Hereditary genius : an inquiry into its laws and consequences

ALBERT R. MANN
LIBRARY

AT

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

COR ELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 1924 054 707 212.

Cornell University
Library

The original of tliis book is in
tlie Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924054707272

HEREDITAEY GENIUS

HEEEDITARY GENIUS

AN INQUIRY INTO

ITS LAWS AND CONSEQUENCES

FEANCIS GALTON, F.E.S., etc.

MACMILLAN AND CO.

AND NEW YORK
1892'

The Bight of Translation and Seproduction is Reserved

ElCHARD Ql-AY AND SONS, LIMITED
LOKDON AND BUNGAY

First Edition (Svo) 1869
Second Edition (Extra Crown Svo) 1892

3f

Ql3

PEEFAGE TO THE OEIGINAL EDITION

The idea of investigating the subject of hereditary genius
occurred to me during the course of a purely ethnological
inquiry, into the mental peculiarities of different races;
when the fact, that characteristics cling to families, was
so frequently forced on my notice as to induqe me to pay
especial attention to that branch of the subject. I began
by thinking over the dispositions and achievements of my
contemporaries at school, at college, and in after life,
and was surprised to find how frequently ability seemed
to go by descent. Then I made a cursory examination
into the kindred of about four hundred illustrious men of
all periods of history, and the results were such, in my
own opinion, as completely to establish the theory that
genius was hereditary, under limitations that required to
be investigated. Thereupon I set to work to gather a
large amount of carefully selected biographical data, and
in the meantime wrote two articles on the subject, which
appeared in Macmillan's Magazine in June and in August,
1865. I also attacked the subject from many different
sides and sometimes with very minute inquiries, because
it was long before the methods I finally adopted were
matured. I mention all this, to show that the foundation

PREFACE TO THE ORIGINAL EDITION

for my theories is broader than appears in the book, and
as a partial justification if I have occasionally been be-
trayed into speaking somewhat more confidently than the
evidence I have adduced would warrant.

I trust the reader will pardon a small percentage of
error and inaccuracy, if it be so small as not to affect the
general value of my results. No one can hate inaccuracy
more than myself, or can have a higher idea of what an
author owes to his readers, in respect to precision ; but, in
a subject like this, it is exceedingly difficult to correct
every mistake, and still more so to avoid omissions. I have
often had to run my eyes over many pages of large bio-
graphical dictionaries and volumes of memoirs to arrive
at data, destined to be packed into half a dozen lines, in
an appendix to one of my many chapters.

The theory of hereditary genius, though usually scouted,
has been advocated by a few writers in past as well as in
modern times. But I may claim to be the first to treat
the subject in a statistical manner, to arrive at numerical
results, and to introduce the " law of deviation from an
average " into discussions on heredity.

A great many subjects are discussed in the following
pages, which go beyond the primary issue, — whether or
no genius be hereditary. I could not refuse to consider
them, because the bearings of the theory I advocate are
too important to be passed over in silence.

PEEFATORY CHAPTEE TO THE
EDITION OF 1892

This volume is a reprint of a work published twenty-
three years ago, which has long been unpurchasable,
except at second-hand and at fancy prices. It was a
question whether to revise the whole and to bring the
information up to date, or simply to reprint it after
remedying a few staring errata. The latter course has
been adopted, because even a few additional data would
have made it necessary to recast all the tabulations, while
a thorough reconstruction would be a work of greater
labour than I can now undertake.

At the time when the book was written, the human
mind was popularly thought to act independently of
natural laws, and to be capable of almost any achieve-
ment, if compelled to exert itself by a will that had a power
of initiation. Even those who had more philosophical habits
of thought were far from looking upon the mental faculties
of each individual as being limited with as much strict-
ness as those of his body, still less was the idea of the
hereditary transmission of ability clearly apprehended.
The earlier part of the book should be read in the light
of the imperfect knowledge of the time when it was
written, since what was true in the above respects

PREFATORY CHAPTER

for the year 1869 does not continue to be true for
1892.

Many of the lines of inquiry that are suggested or
hinted at in this book have since been pursued by
myself, and the results have been published in various
memoirs. They are for the most part epitomised in three
volumes — namely, English Men of Science (1874), fftoman
Faculty (1883), Natural Inheritance (1889) ; also to some
small extent in a fourth volume, now about to be pub-
lished, on Finger- Marks.

The fault in the volume that I chiefly regret is the
choice of its title of Hereditary Genius, but it cannot be
remedied now. There was not the slightest intention on
my part to use the word genius in any technical sense,
but merely as expressing an ability that was exceptionally
high, and at the same time inborn. It was intended to be
used in the senses ascribed to the word in Johnson's Dic-
tionary, viz. "Mental power or faculties. Disposition of
nature by which any one is qualified to some peculiar
employment. Nature ; disposition." A person who is a
genius is defined as — A man endowed with superior
faculties. This exhausts all that Johnson has to say on
the matter, except as regards the imaginary creature of
classical authors called a Genius, which does not concern
us, and which he describes as the protecting or ruling
power of men, places, or tilings. There is nothing in the
quotations from standard authors with which Johnson
illustrates his definitions, that justifies a strained and
technical sense being given to the word, nor is there
anything of the kind in the Latin word ingcnium.

Hereditary Genius therefore seemed to be a more
expressive and just title than Hereditary Ability, for
ability does not exclude the effects of education^, which

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

genius does. The reader will find a studious abstinence
throughout the work from speaking of genius as a special
quality. It is freely used as an equivalent for natural
ability, in the opening of the chapter on " Comparison of
the Two Classifications." In the only place, so far as I
have noticed on reading the book again, where any dis-
tinction is made between them, the uncertainty that still
clings to the meaning of the word genius in its technical
sense is emphatically dwelt upon (p. 320). Tliere is iiu
confusion of ideas in this respect in the book, but its title
seems apt to mislead, and if it could be altered now, it
should appear as Hereditary Ability.

The relation between genius in its technical sense
(whatever its precise definition may be) and insanity,
has been much insisted upon by Lombroso and others,
whose views of the closeness of the connection between
the two are so pronounced, that it would hardly be
surprising if one of their more enthusiastic followers
were to remark that So-and-So cannot be a genius,
because he has never been mad nor is there a single
lunatic in his family. I cannot go nearly so far as they,
nor accept a moiety of their data, on which the connection
between ability of a very high order and insanity is
supposed to be established. Still, there is a large
residuum of evidence which poiats to a painfully close
relation between the two, and I must add that my own
later observations have tended in the same direction, for
I have been surprised at finding how often insanity or
idiocy has appeared among the near relatives of excep-
tionally able men. Those who are over eager and ex-
tremely active in mind must often possess brains that
are more excitable and peculiar than is consistent with
soundness. They are likely to become crazy at times,

PREFATORY CHAPTER

and perhaps to break down altogether. Their hiborn
excitability and peculiarity may be expected to appear
in some of their relatives also, but unaccompanied with
an equal dose of preservative qualities, whatever they
may be. Those relatives would be "crank," if not
insane.

There is much that is indefinite in the application of
the word genius. It is applied to many a youth by his
contemporaries, but more rarely by biographers, who do
not always agree among themselves. If genius means a
sense of inspiration, or of rushes of ideas from apparently
supernatural sources, or of an inordinate and burning
desire to accomplish any particular end, it is perilously
near to the voices heard by the insane, to their delirious
tendencies, or to their monomanias. It cannot in such
cases be a healthy faculty, nor can it be desirable to
perpetuate it by inheritance. The natural ability of
which this book mainly treats, is such as a modern
European possesses in a much greater average share
than men of the lower races. There is nothing either in
the history of domestic animals or in that of evolution to
make us doubt that a race of sane men may be formed^
who shall be as much superior mentally and morally to
the modern European, as the modern European is to the
lowest of the Negro races. Individual departures from
this high average level in an upward direction would
afford an adequate supply of a degree of ability that is
exceedingly rare now, and is much wanted.

It may prove helpful to the reader of the volume to
insert in this introductory chapter a brief summary of its
data and course of arguments. The primary object was
to investigate whether and in what degree natural ability
was hereditarily transmitted. This could not be easily

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

accomplished without a prehminary classification of ability
according to a standard scale, so the first part of the book
is taken up with an attempt to provide one.

The method employed is based on the law commonly
known to mathematicians as that of " frequency of error,"
because it Avas devised by them to discover the frequency
with which various proportionate amounts of error might
be expected to occur in astronomical and geodetical opera-
tions, and thereby to estimate the value that was probably
nearest the truth, from a mass of slightly discordant
measures of the same fact.

Its application had been extended by Quetelet to the
proportions of the human body, on the grounds that the
differences, say in stature, between men of the same race
might theoretically be treated as if they were Errors made
by Nature in her attempt to mould individual men of the
same race according to the same ideal pattern. Fantastic
as such a notion may appear to be when it is expressed in
these bare terms, without the accompaniment of a full
explanation, it can be shown to rest on a perfectly just
basis. Moreover, the theoretical predictions were found
by him to be correct, and their correctness in analogous
cases under reasonable reservations has been confirmed by
multitudes of subsequent observatioiis, of which perhaps
the most noteworthy are those of Professor WeMon, on
that humble creature the common shrimp {Proc. Royal
Society, p. 2, vol. 51, 1892).

One effect of the law may be expressed under this
form, though it is not that which was used by Quetelet.
Suppose 100 adult Englishmen to be selected at random,
and ranged in the order of their statures in a row ; the
statures of the 50th and the 51st men would be almost
identical, and would represent the average of all the

PREFATORY CHAPTER

statures. Then the difference, according to the law of
frequency, between them and the 63rd man would be the
same as that between the 63rd and the 75th, the 76th
and the 84th, the 84th and the 90th. The intervening
men between these divisions, whose numbers are 13, 12,
9, and 6, form a succession of classes, diminishing as we
see in numbers, but each separated from its neighbours by
equal grades of stature. The diminution of the successive
classes is thus far small, but it would be found to proceed
at an enormously accelerated rate if a much longer row
than that of 100 men were taken, and if the classificatiGn
were pushed much further, as is fully shown in this book.

After some provisional verification, I applied this same
law to mental faculties, working it backwards in order to
obtain a scale of ability, and to be enabled thereby to give
precision to the epithets employed. Thus the rank of first
in 4,000 or thereabouts is expressed by the word" eminent."
The application of the law of frequency of error to mental
faculties has now become accepted by many persons, for it
is found to accord well with observation. I know of exam-
iners who habitually use it to verify the general accuracy of
the marks given to many candidates in the same examina^
tion. Also I am informed by one mathematician that before
dividing his examinees into classes, some regard is paid to
this law. There is nothing said in this book about the law of
frequency that subsequent experience has not confirmed
and even extended, except that more emphatic warning
is needed against its unchecked application.

The next step was to gain a general idea as to the
transmission of ability, foimded upon a large basis of
homogeneous facts by which to test the results that might
be afterwards obtained from more striking but less homo-
geneous data. It was necessary, in seeking for these, to

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

sedulously guard against any bias of my own ; it was also
essential that the group to be dealt with should be suffi-
ciently numerous for statistical treatment, and again, that
the family histories of the persons it contained should be
accessible, and, if possible, already published.

The list at length adopted for this prefatory purpose
was that of the English Judges since the Reformation.
Their kinships were analyzed, and the percentage of
their " eminent " relations in the vai'ious near degrees
were tabulated and the results discussed. These were
very striking, and seemed amply sufficient of themselves
to prove the main question. Various objections to the
validity of the inferences drawn from them may, how-
ever, arise ; they are considered, and, it is believed,
disposed of, in the book.

After doing this, a series of lists were taken in suc-
cession, of the most illustrious statesmen, commanders,
literary men, men of science, poets, musicians, and painters,
of whom history makes mention. To each of these lists
were added many English eminent men of recent times,
whose biographies are familiar, or, if not, are easily acces-
sible. The lists were drawn up without any bias of my
own, for I always relied mainly upon the judgment of
others, exercised without any knowledge of the object of
the present inquiry, such as the selections made by his-
torians or critics. After the lists of the illustrious men
had been disposed of, a large group of eminent Protestant
divines were taken in hand — namely, those who were in-
cluded in Middleton's once well known and highly esteemed
biographical dictionary of such persons. Afterwards the
Senior Classics of Cambridge were discussed, then the north
country oarsmen and wrestlers. In the principal lists all
the selected names were inserted, in which those who

PREFATORY CHAPTER

were known to have eminent kinsmen were printed in
italics, so the proportion of failures can easily be compared
with that of the successes. Each list was followed, as the
list of the judges had been, with a brief dictionary of
kinships, all being afterwards tabulated and discussed in
the same way. Finally the various results were brought
together and compared, showing a remarkable general
agreement, with a few interesting exceptions. One of
these exceptions lay in the preponderating influence of the
maternal side in the case of the divines ; this was discussed
and apparently accounted for.

The remainder of the volume is taken up with topics
that are suggested by the results of the former portion,
such as the comparative worth of different races, the
influences that affect the natural ability of nations, and
finally a chapter of general considerations.

If the work were rewritten, the part of the last chapter
which refers to Darwin's provisional theory of pangenesis
would require revision, and ought to be largely extended,
in order to deal with the evidence for and against the
hereditary transmission of habits that were not inborn,
but had been acquired through practice. Marvellous as is
the power of the theory of pangenesis in bringing large
classes of apparently different phenomena under a single
law, serious objections have since arisen to its validity, and
prevented its general acceptance. It would, for example,
almost compel us to believe that the hereditary trans-
mission of accidental mutilations and of acquired aptitudes
would be the rule and not the exception. But leaving
out of the question all theoretical reasons against this
belief, such as those which I put forward myself many
years ago, as well as the more cogent ones adduced by
Weissman in late years, — putting these wholly aside, and

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

appealing to experimental evidence, it is now certain that
the tendency of acquired habits to be hereditarily trans-
mitted is at the most extremely small. There may be
some few cases, like those of Brown-Sequard's guinea-
pigs, in which injury to the nervous substance of the
parents affects their offspring ; but as a general rule, with
scarcely any exception that cannot be ascribed to other
influences, such as bad nutrition or transmitted microbes,
the injuries or habits of the parents are found to have
no effect on the natural form or faculties of the child.
Whether very small hereditary influences of the supposed
kind, accumulating in the same direction for many genera-
tions, may not ultimately affect the qualities of the species,
seems to be the only point now seriously in question.

Many illustrations have been offered, by those few per-
sons of high authority who still maintain that acquired
habits, such as the use or disuse of particular organs in
the parents, admit of being hereditarily transmitted in a
sufiicient degree to notably affect the whole breed after
many generations. Among these illustrations much stress
has been laid on the diminishing size of the human jaw,
in highly civilized peoples. It is urged that their food is
better cooked and more toothsome than that of their
ancestors, consequently the masticating apparatus of the
race has dwindled through disuse. The truth of the
evidence on which this argument rests is questionable,
because it is not at all certain that non-European races
who have more powerful jaws than ourselves use them
more than we do. A Chinaman lives, and has lived for
centuries, on rice and spoon-meat, or such over-boiled diet .
as his chopsticks can deal with. Equatorial Africans live
to a great extent on bananas, or else on cassava, which,
being usually of the poisonous kind, must be well boiled

PREFATORY CHAPTER

before it is eaten, in order to destroy the poison. Many of
the Eastern Archipelago islanders live on sago. Pastoral
tribes eat meat occasionally, but their usual diet is inilk
or curds. It is only the hunting tribes who habitually live
upon tough meat. It follows that the diminishing size of
the human jaw in highly civilized people must be ascribed
to other causes, such as those, whatever they may be, that
reduce the weight of the whole skeleton in delicately
nurtured animals.

It seems feasible to subject the question to experiment,
whether certain acquired habits, acting during at least ten,
twenty, or more generations, have any sensible effects on
the race. I will repeat some remarks on this subject which
I made two years ago, first in a paper read at a Congress
in Paris, and afterwards at the British Association at
Newcastle. The position taken was that the experiments
ought to be made on a large scale, and upon creatures that
were artificially hatched, and therefore wholly isolated
from maternal teachings. Fowls, moths, and fish were the
particular creatures suggested. Fowls are reared in in-
cubators at very many places on a large scale, especially in
France. It seemed not difficult to devise piractices as-
sociated with peculiar calls to food, with colours connected
with food, or with food that was found to be really good
though deterrent in appearance, and in certain of the
breeding-places to regularly subject the chicks to these
practices. Then, after many generations had passed by, to
examine whether or no the chicks of the then generation
had acquired any instinct for performing them, by compar-
ing their behaviour with that of chicks reared in other
places. As regards moths, the silkworm industry is so
extensive and well understood that there would be abund-
ant opportunity for analogous experiments with moths

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

both in France and Italy. The estabUshments for piscicul-
ture afford another field. It would not be worth while to
initiate courses of such experiments unless the crucial
value of what they could teach us when completed had first
been fully assented to. To my own mind they would rank
as crucial experiments so far as they went, and be worth
undertaking, but they did not apf)ear to strike others so
strongly in the same light. Of course before any such
experiments were set on foot, they would have to be con-
sidered in detail by many competent minds, and be closely
criticised.

Another topic would have been treated at more length
if this book were rewritten — namely, the distinction be-
tween variations and sports. It would even require a
remodelling of much of the existing matter. The views
I have been brought to entertain, since it was written, are
amplifications of those which are already put forward in
pp. 354-5, but insufficiently pushed there to their logical
conclusion. They are, that the word variation is used
indiscriminately to express two fundamentally distinct
conceptions : sports, and variations properly so called. It
has been shown in Natural Inheritance that the distribution
of faculties in a population cannot possibly remain con-
stant, if, on the average, the children resemble their parents.
If they did so, the giants (in any mental or physical par-
ticular) would become more gigantic, and the dwarfs more
dwarfish, in each successive generation. The counteract-
ing tendency is what I called "regression." The filial
centre is not the same as th.e parental centre, but it is nearer
to mediocrity ; it regresses towards the racial centre. In
other words, the filial centre (or the fraternal centre, if we
change the point of view) is always nearer, on the average,
to the racial centre than the parental centre was. There

h

PREFATORY CHAPTER

must be an average " regression " in passing from the
parental to the fihal centre.

It is impossible briefly to give a full idea, in this place,
either of the necessity or of the proof of regression ; they
have been thoroughly discussed in the work in question.
Suffice it to say, that the result gives precision to the
idea of a typical centre from which individual variations
occur in accordance with the law of frequency, often to
a small amount, more rarely to a larger one, very rarely
indeed to one that is much larger, and practically never
to one that is larger still. The filial centre falls back
further towards mediocrity in a constant proportion to the
distance to which the parental centre has deviated from it,
whether the direction of the deviation be in excess or in
deficiency. All true variations are (as I maintain) of
this kind, and it is in consequence impossible that the
natural qualities of a race may be permanently changed
through the action of selection upon mere variations. The
selection of the most serviceable variations cannot even
produce any great degree of artificial and temporary im-
provement, because an equilibrium between deviation and
regression will soon be reached, whereby the best of the
offspring will cease to be better than their own sires and
dams.

The case is quite different in respect to what are tech-
nically known as "sports." In these, a new character
suddenly makes its appearance in a particular individual,
causing him to differ distinctly from his parents' and from
others of his race. Such new characters are also found to
be transmitted to descendants. Here there has been a
change of typical centre, a new point of departure has
somehow come into existence, towards which regression
has henceforth to be measured, and consequently a real

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

step forward has been made in the course of evolution.
When natural selection favours a particular sport, it works
effectively towards the formation of a new species, but the
favour that it simultaneously shows to mere variations
seems to be thrown away, so far as that end is concerned.

There may be entanglement between a sport and a
variation which leads to a hybrid and unstable result, well
exemplified in the imperfect character of the fusion of dif-
ferent human races. Here numerous pure specimens of their
several ancestral types are apt to crop out, notwithstanding
the intermixture by marriage that had been going on for
many previous generations.

It has occurred to others as well as myself, as to Mr.
Wallace and to Professor Romanes, that the time may
have arrived when an institute for experiments on here-
dity might be established with advantage. A farm and
garden of a very few acres, with varied exposure, and well
supplied with water, placed under the charge of intelligent
caretakers, supervised by a biologist, would afford the
necessary basis for a great variety of researcti upon in-
expensive animals and plants. The difficulty lies in the
smallness of the number of competent persons who are
actively engaged in hereditary inquiry, who could be de-
pended upon to use it properly.

The direct result of this inquiry is to make manifest the
great and measurable differences between the mental and
bodily faculties of individuals, and to prove that the laws
of heredity are as applicable to the former as to the latter.
Its indirect result is to show that a vast but unused power
is vested in each generation over the very natures of their
successors — that is, over their inborn faculties and disposi-
tions. The brute power of doing this by means of appro-
priate marriages or abstention from marriage undoubtedly

h 2

PKEFATOEY CHAPTER

exists, however much the circumstances of social life may
hamper its employment.^ The great problem of the future
betterment of the human race is confessedly, at the present
time, hardly advanced beyond the stage of academic inter-
est, but thought and action move swiftly nowadays, and
it is by no means impossible that a generation which has
witnessed the exclusion of the Chinese race from the cus-
tomary privileges of settlers in two continents, and the
deportation of a Hebrew population from a large portion
of a third, may live to see other analogous acts performed
under sudden socialistic pressure. The striking results of
an evil inheritance have already forced themselves so far
on the popular mind, that indignation is freely expressed,
without any marks of disapproval from others, at the yearly
output by unfit parents of weakly children who are con-
stitutionally incapable of growing up into serviceable
citizens, and who are a serious encumbrance to the nation.
The questions about to be considered may unexpectedly
acquire importance as falling within the sphere of practical
politics, and if so, many demographic data that require
forethought and time to collect, and a dispassionate and
leisurely judgment to discuss, will be hurriedly and sorely
needed.

The topics to which I refer are the relative fertility of
different classes and races, and their tendency to supplant
one another under various circumstances.

The whole question of fertility under the various con-
ditions of civilized life requires more detailed research
than it has yet received. We require further investigations
into the truth of the hypothesis of Malthus, that there is
really no limit to over-population beside that which is

^ These remarks were submitted in my Presidential Address to the
International Congress of Demography, held in London in 1892.

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

afforded by misery or prudential restraint. Is it true that
misery, in any justifiable sense of that word, provides the
only check which acts automatically, or arc other causes in
existence, active, though as yet obscure, that assist in re-
straining the overgrowth of population ? It is certain that
the productiveness of different mamages differs greatly
in consequence of unexplained conditions. The variation
in fertility of different kinds of animals that have been
captured when wild and afterwards kept in menageries is,
as Darwin long since pointed out, most notable and appar-
ently capricious. The majority of those which thrive in con-
finement, and apparently enjoy excellent health, are never-
theless absolutely infertile ; others, often of closely allied
species, have their productivity increased. One of the
many evidences of our great ignorance of the laws that
govern fertility, is seen in the behaviour of bees, who have
somehow discovered that by merely modifying the diet and
the size of the nursery of any female grub, they can at
will cause it to develop, either into a naturally sterile
worker, or into the potential mother of a huge hive.

Demographers have, undoubtedly, collected and collated
a vast amount of information bearing on the fertility of
different nations, but they have mainly attacked the prob-
lem in the gross and not in detail, so that we possess little
more than mean values that are applicable to general
populations, and are very valuable in their way, but we
remain ignorant of much else, that a moderate amount of
judiciously directed research might, perhaps, be able to tell.

As an example of what could be sought with advantage,
let us suppose that we take a number, sufficient for
statistical purposes, of persons occupying different social
classes, those who are the least efficient in physical, intel-
lectual, and moral grounds, forming our lowest class, and

PREFATORY CHAPTKR

those who are the most efficient forming our highest class.
The question to be solved relates to the hereditary per-
manence of the several classes. What proportion of each
class is descended from parents who belong to the same
class, and what proportion is descended from parents who
belong to each of the other classes ? Do those persons
who have honourably succeeded in life, and who are pre-
sumably, on the whole, the most valuable portion of our
human stock, contribute on the aggregate their fair share
of posterity to the next generation ? If not, do they con-
tribute more or less than their fair share, and in what
degree ? In other words, is the evolution of man in each
particular country, favourably or injuriously affected by its
special form of civilization ?

Enough is already knov/n to make it certain that the
productiveness of both the extreme classes, the best and
the worst, falls short of the average of the nation as a
whole. Therefore, the most prolific class necessarily lies
between the two extremes, but at what intermediate point
does it lie ? Taken altogether, on any reasonable principle,
are the natural gifts of the most prolific class, bodily, in-
tellectual, and moral, above or below the line of national
mediocrity ? If above that line, then the existing con-
ditions are favourable to the improvement of the race. If
they are below that line, they must work towards its
degradation.

These very brief remarks serve to shadow out the prob-
lem; it would require much more space than is now
available, before it could be phrased in a way free from
ambiguity, so that its solution would clearly instruct us
whether the conditions of life at any period in any given
race were tending to raise or to depress its natural
qualities.

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

Whatever other countries may or may not have lost,
ours has certainly gained on more than one occasion by
the infusion of the breed of selected sub-races, especially
of that of the Protestant refugees from religious persecu-
tion on the Continent. It seems reasonable to look upon
the Huguenots as men who, on the whole, had inborn
qualities of a distinctive kind from the majority of their
countrymen, and who may, therefore, be spoken of as a
sub-type — that is to say, capable, when isolated, of con-
tinuing their race without its showing any strong tendency
to revert to the form of the earlier type from which it was
a well-defined departure. It proved, also, that the cross
breed between them and our ancestors was a singularly
successful mixture. Consequently, England has been
largely indebted to the natural refinement and to the solid
worth of the Huguenot breed, as well as to the culture
and technical knowledge that the Huguenots brought
with them.

The frequency in history with which one race has sup-
planted another over wide geographical areas is one of the
most striking facts in the evolution of mankind. The deni-
zens of the world at the present day form a very different
human stock to that which inhabited it a dozen generations
ago, and to all appearance a no less difference will be found
in our successors a dozen of generations hence. Partly it
may be that new human varieties have come into per-
manent or only into temporary existence, like that most re-
markable mixed race of the Normans many centuries ago,
in whom, to use well-known words of the late Professor
Freeman, the indomitable vigour of the Scandinavians,
joined to the buoyant vivacity of the Gaul, produced the
conquering and ruling race of Europe. But principally
the change of which I spoke is due to great alterations in

PREFATORY CHAPTER

the proportions of those who belong to the old and well
established types. The Negro now boin in the United
States has much the same natural faculties as his distant
cousin who is born in Africa ; the effect of his transplanta-
tion being ineffective in changing his nature, but very
effective in increasing his numbers, in enlarging the range
of his distribution, and in destroying native American races.
There are now some 8,000,000 of Negroes in lands where
not one of them existed twelve generations ago, and prob-
ably not one representative of the race which they displaced
remains there ; on the other hand, there has been no
corresponding diminution of numbers in the parent home
of the Negro. Precisely the same may be said of the
European races who have during the same period swarmed
over the temperate regions of the globe, forming the nuclei
of many future nations.

It is impossible, even in the vaguest way, in a brief
space, to give a just idea of the magnitude and variety of
changes produced in the human stock by the political
events of the last few generations, and it would be difficult
to do so in such a way as not to seriously wound the
patriotic susceptibilities of many readers. The natural
temperaments and moral ideals of different races are
various, and praise or blame cannot be applied at the dis-
cretion of one person without exciting remonstrance from
others who take different views with perhaps equal justice.
The birds and beasts assembled in conclave may try to
pass a unanimous resolution in favour of the natural duty
of the mother to nurture and protect her offspring, but the
cuckoo would musically protest. The Irish Celt may desire
the extension of his race and the increase of its influence
in the representative governments of England and America,
but the wishes of his Anglo-Saxon or Teuton fellow-sub-

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

jects may lie in the opposite direction ; and so on indefin-
itely. My object now is merely to urge inquiries into the
historical fact whether legislation, which has led to the
substitution on a large scale of one race for another, has
not often been the outcome of conflicting views into which
the question of race hardly entered at all, and which were
so nearly balanced that if the question of race had been
properly introduced into the discussion the result might
have been different. The possibility of such being the
case cannot be doubted, and affords strong reason for justly
appraising the influence of race, and of hereafter including
it at neither more nor less than its real value, among the
considerations by which political action will be determined.

The importance to be attached to race is a question that
deserves a far larger measure of exact investigation than
it receives. We are exceedingly ignorant of the respective
ranges of the natural and acquired faculties in different
races, and there is too great a tendency among writers
to dogmatize wildly about them, some grossly magnifying,
others as greatly minimising their several provinces. It
seems however possible to answer this question unam-
biguously, difficult as it is.

The recent attempts by many European nations to utilize
Africa for their own purposes gives immediate and practical
interest to inquiries that bear on the transplantation of
races. They compel us to face the question as to what
races should be politically aided to become hereafter the
chief occupiers of that continent. The varieties of
Negroes, Bantus, Arab half-breeds, and others who now
inhabit Africa are very numerous, and they differ much
from one another in their natural qualities. Some of them
must be more suitable than others to thrive under that
form of moderate civilization which is likely to be intro-

PREFATORY CHAPTER

duced into Africa by Europeans, who will enforce justice
and order, excite a desire among the natives for comforts
and luxuries, and make steady industry almost a condition
of living at all. Such races would spread and displace the
others by degrees. Or it may prove that the Negroes,
one and all, will fail as completely under the new con-
ditions as they have failed under the old ones, to submit
to the needs of a superior civilization to their own ; in this
case their races, numerous and prolific as they are, will in
course of time be supplanted and replaced by their betters.
It seems scarcely possible as yet to assure ourselves as
to the possibility of any variety of white men to work, to
thrive, and to continue their race in the broad regions of
the tropics. We could not do so without better knowledge
than we now possess of the different capacities of indivi-
duals to withstand their malarious and climatic influences.
Much more care is taken to select appropriate varieties of
plants and animals for plantation in foreign settlements,
than to select appropriate types of men. Discrimination
and foresight are shown in the one case, an indifference
born of ignorance is shown in the other. The importance
is not yet sufficiently recognized of a more exact examina-
tion and careful record than is now made of the physical
qualities and hereditary antecedents of candidates for em-
ployment in tropical countries. We require these records
to enable us to learn hereafter what are the conditions in
youth that are prevalent among those whose health sub-
sequently endured the change of climatic influence satis-
factorily, and conversely as regards those who failed. It is
scarcely possible to properly conduct such an investigation
retrospectively.

In conclusion I wish again to emphasize the fact that
the improvement of the natural gifts of future generations

TO THE EDITION OF 1892

of tlie human race is largely, though indirectly, under our
control. We may not be able to originate, but we can guide.
The processes of evolution are in constant and spontaneous
activity, some pushing towards the bad, some towards the
good. Our part is to watch for opportunities to intervene
by checking the former and giving free play to the latter.
We must distinguish clearly between our power in this
fundamental respect and that which we also possess of
ameliorating education and hygiene. It is earnestly to be
hoped that inquiries will be increasingly directed into
historical facts, with the view of estimating the possible
effects of reasonable political action in the future, in gra-
dually raising the present miserably low standard of the
human race to one in which the Utopias in the dreamland
of philanthropists may become practical possibilities.

CONTENTS

INTEODUCTOET CHAPTEE . . 1

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING TO THEIR REPUTATION . . 5

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS . 12

COMPARISON OF THE TWO CLASSIFICATIONS ... 33

NOTATION , . 44

THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 . 49

STATESMEN . . . , , 98

ENGLISH PEERAGES, THEIR INFLUENCE UPON RACE . . 123

COMMANDERS ... . ... .... 134

LITERARY MEN . ... 160

MEN OF SCIENCE . . 185

POETS .... . .... . . 218

MUSICIANS . . . ■ . 230

PAINTERS . , . 239

DIVINES . .... . .... 249

SENIOR CLASSICS OF CAMBRIDGE .... . 289

OARSMEN . . . . 296

WRESTLERS OF THE NORTH COUNTRY . 303

COMPARISON OF RESULTS . . . . . . 307

THE COMPARATIVE WORTH OF DIFFERENT RACES . 325

INFLUENCES THAT AFFECT THE NATURAL ABILITY OF NATIONS . 338

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS . . 349

APPENDIX . . 362

INDEX .... 369

HEEEDITAEY GENIUS

IJSrTEODUOTORY CHAPTEK

great gratification, by many of the highest authorities on
heredity. In reproducing them, as I now do, in a much
more elaborate form, and on a greatly enlarged basis of
induction, I feel assured that, inasmuch as what I then
wrote was sufficient to earn the acceptance of Mr. Darwin
("Domestication of Plants and Animals," ii. 7), the increased
amount of evidence submitted in the present volume is not
likely to be gainsaid.

The general plan of my argument is to show that high
reputation is a pretty accurate test of high ability ; next
to discuss the relationships of a > large body of fairly
eminent men— namely, the Judges of England from 1660
to 1868, the Statesmen of the time of George III., and
the Premiers during the last 100 years — and to obtain
from these a general survey of the laws of heredity in
respect to genius. Then I shall examine, in order, the
kindred of the most illustrious Commanders, men of
Literature and of Science, Poets, Painters, and Musicians,
of whom history speaks. I shall also discuss the kindred
of a certain selection of Divines and of ihodern Scholars.
Then will follow a short chapter, by way of comparison,
on the hereditary transmission of physical gifts, as deduced
from the relationships of certain classes of Oarsmen and
Wrestlers. Lastly, I shall collate my results, and draw
conclusions.

It will be observed that I deal with more than one
grade of ability. Those upon whom the greater part of
my volume is occupied, and on whose kinships mj argu-
ment is most securely based, have been generally reputed
as endowed by nature with extraordinary genius. There
are so few of these men that, although they are scattered
throughout the whole historical period of human existence,
their number does not amount to more than 400, and yet
a considerable proportion of them will be found to be
interrelated.

Another grade of ability with which I deal is that which
includes numerous highly eminent, and all the illustrious
names of modem English history, whose immediate de-
scendants are living among us, whose histories are popularly
known, and whose relationships may readily be traced by

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER

the help of biographical dictionaries, peerages, and similar
■books of reference.

A third and lower grade is that of the English Judges,
massed together as a whole, for the purpose of the pre-
fatory statistical inquiry of which I have already spoken.
No one doubts that many of the ablest intellects of our
race are to be found among the Judges ; nevertheless the
average ability of a Judge cannot be rated as equal to that
x>f the lower of the two grades I have described.

I trust the reader will make allowance for a large and
somewhat' important class of omissions I have felt myself
compelled to make when treating of the eminent men
of modern days. I am prevented by a sense of decorum
from quoting names of their relations in contemporary life
who are not recognized as public characters, although their
abilities may be highly appreciated in private life. Still
less consistent with decorum would it have been, to intro-
duce the names of female relatives that stand in the same
category. My case is so overpoweringly strong, that I am
perfectly able to prove my point without having recourse
to this class of evidence. Nevertheless, the reader should
bear in mind that it exists; and I beg he will do me
the justice of allowing that I have not overlooked the
whole of the evidence that does not appear in my pages.
I am deeply conscious of the imperfection of my work,
but my sins are those of omission, not of com^mission.
Such errors as I may and must have made, which give
a fictitious support to my arguments, are, I am confident,
out of all proportion fewer than such omissions of facts as
would have helped to establish them.

I have taken little notice in this book of modern men
of eminence who are not English, or at least well known
to Englishmen. I feared, if I included large classes of
foreigners, that I should make glaring errors. It requires
a very great deal of labour to hunt out relationships,
even with the facilities afforded to a countryman having
access to persons acquainted with the various families;
much more would it have been difficult to hunt out the
kindred of foreigners. I should have especially liked to
investigate the biographies of Italians and Jews, both of

B 2

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER

whom appear to be rich in families of high intellectual
breeds. Germany and America are also full of interest.
It is a little less so with respect to France, where the
Revolution and the guillotine made sad havoc among the
progeny of her abler races.

There is one advantage to a candid critic in my having
left so large a field untouched ; it enables me to propose
a test that any well-informed reader may easily adopt who
doubts the fairness of my examples. He may most reason-
ably suspect that I have been unconsciously influenced
by my theories to select men whose kindred were most
favourable to their support. If so, I beg he will test my
impartiality as follows : — Let him take a .dozen names of
his own selection, as the most eminent in whatever pro-
fession and in whatever country he knows most about, and
let him trace out for himself their relations. It is necessary,
as I find by experience, to take some pains to be sure that
none, even of the immediate relatives, on either the male
or female side, have been overlooked. If he does what
I propose, I am confident he will be astonished at the
completeness with which the results will confirm my
theory. I venture to speak with assurance, because it has
often occurred to me to propose this very test to incre-
dulous friends, and invariably, so far as my memory serves
me, as large a proportion of the men who were named
were discovered to have eminent relations, as the nature
of my views on heredity would have led me to expect.

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING TO
THEIR REPUTATION

The- arguments by which I endeavour to prove that
genius is hereditary, consist in showing how large is the
nuriiber of instances iu which men who are more or less
illustrious have eminent kinsfolk. It is necessary to have
clear ideas on the two following matters before my argu-
ments can be rightly appreciated. The first is the degree
of selection implied by the words " eminent " and " illus-
trious." Does " eminent " mean the foremost iu a hundred,
in a thousand, or in what other number of men ? The
second is the degree to which reputation may be accepted
as a test of ability.

It is essential that I, who write, should have a minimum
qualification distinctly before my eyes whenever I employ
the phrases " eminent " and the like, and that the reader
should understand as clearly as myself the value I attach
to those qualifications. An explanation of these words
will be the subject of the present chapter. A subsequent
chapter will be given to the discussion of how far
"eminence" may be accepted as a criterion of natural
gifts. It is almost needless for me to insist that the sub-
jects of these two chapters are entirely distinct.

I look upon social and professional life as a continuous
examination. All are candidates for the good opinions of
others, and for success in their several professions, and they
achieve success in proportion as the general estimate is
large of their aggregate merits. In ordinary scholastic
examinations marks are allotted in stated proportions to

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

various specified subjects — so many for Latin, so many for
Greek, so many for English history, and the rest. The
world, in the same way, but almost unconsciously, allots
marks to men. It gives them for originality of conception,
for enterprise, for activity and energy, for administrative
skill, for various acquirements, for power of literary ex-
pression, for oratory, and much besides of general value,
as well as for more specially professional merits. It does
not allot these marks according to a proportion that can
easily be stated in words, but there is a rough common-
sense that governs its practice with a fair^ approximation
to constancy. Those who have gained most of these
tacit marks are ranked, by the common judgment of the
leaders of opinion, as theforemost me^ of tl^eir day.

The metaphor of an examination may be stretched much
further. As there are alternative groups in any one of
which a candidate may obtain honours, so it is with repu-
tations — they naay be made in law, literature, science, art,
and in a host of other pursuits. Again: as the mere
attainment of a general fair level will obtain no, honours
in an examination, no more will it do so in the struggle
for eminence. , A man must show conspicuous power in at
least one subject in order to achieve a high reputation.

Let us see how the world classifies people^ after ex-
amining each of them; in her patient, persistent manner,
during the years of their manhood. How many men of
" eminence " are there, arid what .proportion do they bear
to the whole cpmmunity ?

I will begin by analysing a very painstaking biographical
handbook, ktely published by Routledge and Co.,-called
" Men of the Time." Its intention, which is very fairly
and honestly carried out, is to include none but those
whom the world honours for their ability. The catalogue
of names is 2,.500, and a full half of it consists of American
and Continental celebrities. It is well I should give in a
foot-note ^ an analysis of its contents, in order to show the

^ Contenis.of tM " Bidimmry of Men of the Time," Ed. 1865:

62 actors, singers, dancers, &e. ; 7 agriculturists ; 71 antiquaries, arcjise-
ologists, "numismatists, . &c. ; 20 architects ; 120 artists (painters and
designers) ; 950 authors ; 400 dJTines ; 43 engincjers and mechanicians ;

ACCORDING TO THEIR REPUTATION

exhaustive character of its range. The numbers I have
prefixed to each class are not strictly accurate, for I
measured them off rather than counted them, but they
are quite close enough. The same name often appears
under more than one head.

On looking over the book, I am surprised to find how
large a proportion of the "Men of the Time" are past
middle age. It appears that in the cases of high (but by
no means in that of the highest) merit, a man must outlive
the age of fifty to be sure 'of being widely appreciated.
It takes time for an able man, born in the humbler ranks
if life, to emerge from them and to' take his natural posi-
ion. It would not, therefore, be just to compare the
numbers of Englishmen in the book with that of the whole
adult male population of the Biitish isles ; but it is neces-
sary to confine our examination to those of the celebrities
who are past fifty years of age, and to compare their number
with that of the whole male population who are also above
fifty years. I estimate, from examining a large part of
the bpok, that there are about 850 of these men, and that
500 of them are decidedly well known to persons familiar
with literary and scientific society. Now, there are about
two millions of adult males in the British isles above fifty
years of age ; consequently, the total number of the " Men
of the Time" are as 425 to a million, and the more select
paitt of them as 250 to a million.

The qualifications for belonging to what I call the more
select part. are, in my mind, that a man should have dis-
tinguished himself pretty freqiiently either by purely
original work, or as a . leader of opinion. I wholly
exclude notoriety obtained by a single act. This is
a fairly well-defined line, because there is not room for

10 engravers ; 140 lawyers, judges, barristers, and legists ; 94 medical
practitioners, physicians, surgeons, and physiologists ; 39 merchants,
capitalists, manufacturers, and traders; 168 military officers; 12 miscel-
laneous ; 7 moral and metaphysical philosophers, logicians ; 32 musicians
and composers; 67 naturalists, botanists, zoologists, &c. ; S6.navjil officers ;
40 philologists and ethnologists ; 60 poets (but also included in authors) ;
60 political and social economists and philanthropists ; 154 men of science,
astronomers, chemists, geologists, mathematicians, &c. ; 29 sculptors ;
64" sovereigns, members of Toyal families, &c. ; 376 statesmen, diplomatists,
colonial governors, &c. ; 76 travellers and geographers.

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

many men to be eminent. Each interest or idea has
its mouthpiece, and a man who has attained and can
maintain his position as the representative of a party
or an idea, naturally becomes much more conspicuous
than his coadjutors who are nearly equal but inferior in
ability. This" is eminently the case in positions where
eminence may be won by official acts. The balance may
be turned by a grain that- decides whether A, B, or C
shall be promoted, to a vacant post. The man who
obtains it has opportunities of distinction denied to the
others. I do not, however, take much note of official
rank. People who have left very great names behind
them have mostly done so through non-professional
labours. I certainly should not include mere officials,
except of the highest ranks, and in open professions,
among my select list of eminent men.

Another estimate of the proportion of eminent men
to the whole population was made on a different basis,
and gave much the same result. I took the obituary
of the year 1868, published in the Times on January 1st,
1869, and found, in it about fifty names of men of the
more select class. This was in one sense a broader, and
in another a more rigorous selection than that which I
have just described. It was broader, because I included
the names of many whose abilities were high, but who
died too young to have earned the wide reputation they
deserved ; and it was more rigorous, because I excluded
old men who had earned distinction in years gone by,
but had not shown themselves capable in later times
to come again to the front. On the first ground, it was
necessary to lower the limit of the age of the population
with whom they should be compared. Forty-five years
of age seemed to me a. fair limit, including, as it was
supposed to do, a year or two of broken health preceding
decease. Now, 210,000 males die annually in the British
isles above the age of forty-five ; therefore, the ratio
of the more select portion of the " Men of the Time "
on these data is as 50 to 210,000, or as 238 to a
million.

Thirdly, I consulted obituaries of many years back.

ACCORDING TO THEIR REPUTATION

wken the population of these islands was mnch smaller,
and they appeared to me to lead to similar conclusions,
viz. that 250 to a million is an ample estimate.

There would be no difficulty in making a further selec-
tion out of these, to any degree of rigour. We could
select the 200, the 100, or the fifty best out of the 250,
without much uncertainty. But I do not see my way
to work downwards. If I were asked to choose the
thousand per million best men, I should feel we had
descended to a level where there existed no sure data
for guidance, where accident and opportunity had undue
influence, and where it was impossible to distinguish
general eminence from local reputation, or from mere
notoriety.

These contsiderations define the sense in which I
propose to employ the word " eminent." When I speak
of an eminent man, I mean one who has achieved a
position that is attained by only 250 persons in each
million of men, or by one person in each 4,000. 4,000
is a very large number — difficult for persons to realize
who are not accustomed to deal with great assemblages.
On the most brilliant of starlight nights there are
never so many as 4,000 stars visible to the naked eye
at the same time ; yet we feel it to be an extraordinary
distinction to a star to be accounted as the brightest
in the sky. This, be it remembered, is my narrowest
area of selection. I propose to introduce no name
whatever into my lists of kinsmen (unless it be marked
off from the rest by brackets) that is less distin-
guished.

The mass of those with whom I deal are far more
rigidly selected — many are as one in a million, and not
a few as one of many millions. I use the term "illus-
trious " when speaking of these. They are men whom the
whole intelligent part of the nation mourns when they die ;
who have, or deserve to have, a public funeral ; and who
rank in future ages as historical characters.

Permit me to add a word upon the meaning of a million,
being a number so enormous as to be difficult to conceive.
It is well to have a standard by which to realize it. Mine

TO CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

will be understood by many Londoners ,■ it is as; follows : — •
One' summer day I passed the afternoon in Bushey Park
to see the magnificent spectacle of its avenue of horse-r
chestnut trees, a mile long, in full flower. -As -the hours
passed by, it occurred to me to try to count the number
of spikes of flowers facing the drive on one side of the
long avenue — I mean all the spikes that were visible in
full sunshine on one side of the road. Accordingly, I fixed
upon a tree of average bulk and flower, and drew ima-
ginary lines — first halving the tree, theft quartering, and
so on, until I arrived at a subdivision that was not too
large to allow of my counting the spikes of flowers it
included. I did this with three different trees, and arrived
at pretty much the same result : as well as I recollect, the
three estimates were as nine, ten, and eleven. Then I
counted the trees in the avenue, and, multiplying all to-
gether, I found" the spikes to be just about 100,000 in
number. Ever since then, whenever a million is mentioned,
I recall the long perspective of the avenue of Bushey Park,
with its stately chestnuts clothed from top to bottom with
spikes of flowers, bright in the sunshine, and I imagine a
similarly continuous floral band, of ten miles in 'length.

In ilhistration of the value of the extreme rigour
implied by a selection of one in a million, I will take
the following instance. The Oxford and Cambridge boat-
race excites almost a national enthusiasm, and the men
who represent their Universities as competing crews have
good reason to be proud of being the selected champions
of such large bodies. The crew of each boat consists of
eight men, selected out of about 800 students ; namely," the
available undergraduates of about two successive years. In
other words, the selection that is popularly felt to be so
strict, is only as one in a hundred. Now, suppose there
had been so vast a num"ber of universities that it would
have been possible to bring together 800 men, each of
whom had pulled in a University crew, and that from this"
body the eight best were selected to form a special' crew
of comparatively rare merit : the selection of each of these
would be as 1 to 10,000 ordinary men; Let this process
be irepeated, and then, and not till then, do you arrive at

ACCORDma TO THEIR REPUTATION 11

a superlative crew, representing selections of one in a
million. This is a perfectly fair deduction, because the
youths at the Universities are a hap-hazard collection
of men, so far as regards their thews and sinews. No
one is sent to a University on account of his powerful
muscle. Or, to put the same facts into another form : —
it would require a period of no less than 100 years, before
either University could furnish eight men, each of whom
would have sufficient boating erriinence to rank as one of
the medium crew. Ten thousand years must elapse
before eight men could be furnished, each of whom would
have the rank of the superlative crew.

It is, however, quite another matter with respect to brain
power, for, as I shall have occasion to show, the Uni-
versities attract to themselves a large proportion of the
eminent scholastic talent of all England. There are
nearly a quarter of a million males in Great Britain who
arrive each year at the proper age for going to the Urii-'
versity : therefore, if Cambridge, for example, received only-
one in every five of the ablest scholastic intellects, she
would be able, ip. every period of twenty years, to boast of
the fresh arrival of an undergraduate, the rank of whose
scholastic eminence was that of one, in a million.

12 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING
TO THEIE NATURAL GIFTS

T HAVE no patience with the hypothesis occasionally ex-
pressed, and often implied, especially in tales written to
teach children to be good, that babies are born pretty
much alike, and that the sole agencies in creating dif-
ferences between boy and boy, and man and man, are
steady application and moral effort. It is in the most
unqualified manner that I object to pretensions of natural
equality. The experiences of the nursery, the school, the
University, and of professional careers, are a chain of
proofs to the contrary. I acknowledge freely the great
power of education and social influences in developing
the active powers of the mind, just as I acknowledge the
effect of use in developing the muscles of a blacksmith's
arm, and no further. Let the blacksmith labour as he
will, he will find there are certain feats beyond his power
that are well within the strength of a man of herculean
make, even although the latter may have led a sedentary
life. Some years ago, the Highlanders held a grand
gathering in Holland Park, where they challenged all
England to compete with them in their games of strength.
The challenge was accepted, and the well-trained men of
the hills were beaten in the foot-race by a youth who
was stated to be a pure Cockney, the clerk of a London
banker.

Everybody who has trained himself to physical exercises
discovers the extent of his muscular powers to a nicety.
When he begins to walk, to row, to use the dumb bells.

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 13

or to run, he finds to his great delight that his thews
strengthen, and his endurance of fatigue increases day after
day. So long as he is a novice, he perhaps flatters himself
there is hardly an assignable limit to the education of his
muscles ; but the daily gain is soon discovered to diminish,
and at last it vanishes altogether. His maximum per-
formance becomes a rigidly determinate quantity. He
learns to an inch, how high or how far he can jump, when
he has attained the highest state of training. He learns
to half a pound, the force he can exert on the dyna-
mometer, by compressing it. He can strike a blow against
the machine used to measure impact, and drive its index
to a certain graduation, but no further. So it is in running,
in rowing, in walking, and in every other form of physical
exertion. There is a definite limit to the muscular powers
of every man, which he cannot by any education or
exertion overpass.

This is precisely analogous to the experience that every
student has had of the working of his mental powers.
The eao-er boy, when he first goes to school and confronts
intellectual difficulties, is astonished at his progress. He
glories in his newly-developed mental grip and growing
capacity for application, and, it may be, fondly believes
it to be within his reach to become one of the heroes who
have left their mark upon the history of the world. The
years go by ; he competes in the examinations of school
and college, over and over again with his fellows, and soon
finds his place among them. He knows he can beat such
and such of his competitors ; that there are some with
whom he runs on equal terms, and others whose intellectual
feats he cannot even approach. Probably his vanity still
continues to tempt him, by whispering in a new strain. It
tells him that classics, mathematics, and other subjects
taught in universities, are mere scholastic specialities, and
no test of the more valuable intellectual powers. It
reminds him of numerous instances of persons who had
been unsuccessful in the competitions of youth, but who
had shown powers in after-life that made them the foremost
men of their age. Accordingly, with newly furbished hopes,
and with all the ambition of twenty-two years of age, he
leaves his University and enters a larger field of compe-

14 CLASSlriCATION OF MEN

tition. The same kind of experience awaits hinj here that
he has already gone through. Opportunities occur — they
occur to every man — and he finds himself incapable of
grasping them. He tries, and is tried in many things^ - In
a few years more, unless he is incurably blinded by self-
conceit, he learns precisely of what performances he is
capable, and what other enterprises lie beyond his compass.
When he reaches mature life, he is confident only within
certain limits, and knows, or ought to' know, himself just
as he is probably judged of by the world, with all his
unmistakeable weakness and all his undeniable strength.
He is no -longer tormented into hopeless efforts by the
fallacious promptings of overweening vanity, but he limits
his undertakings to matters below the level of his reach,
and finds true moral repose in an honest conviction that
he is engaged in as much good work as his nature has
rendered him capable of performing.

There ca:n hardly be a surer evidence of the enormous
difference between the intellectual capacity of men, than
the prodigious differences in the numbers of marks ob-
tained by those who gain mathematical honours at Cam-
bridge. I therefore crave permission to speak at some
length upon this subject, although the details are dry and
of little general interest. There are between 400 and 450
students who take their degrees in each year, and of these,
about 100 succeed in gaining honours in mathematics, and
are ranged by the examiners in strict order of merit.
About the first forty of those who take mathematical
honours are distinguished by the title of wranglers, and it
is a decidedly creditable thing to be even a low wrangler ;
it will secure a fellowship in a small college. It must be
carefully borne in mind that the distinction of being the
■first in this list of honours, or what is called the senior
wrangler of the year, means a vast deal more than being
the foremost mathematician of 400 or 450 men taken at
hap-hazard. No doubt the large bulk of Cambridge men
are taken almost at hap-hazard. A boy is intended by
his parents for some profession ; if that profession be either
the Church or the Bar, it used to be almost requisite, and
it is still important, that he should be sent to Cambridge
or, Oxford, These youths may justly be considered as

ACCOEDINGt TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 15

haying been taken Eft hap-hazafd. ' But ther^ are many
others who have fairly won their way to the Universities,
and are therefore selected from an enormous area. Fully
one-half of the wra;nglers have been boys of note at their
respective schools, and, conversely, almost all boys of note
at schoolsfind their way to the Universities. Hence it is
that among their comparatively small number of students,
the Universities include the highest youthful scholastic
ability of all England. The senior wrangler, in each suc-
cessive year, is the chief of these as regards mathematics,
and this, the highest distinction, is, or was, continually
won by youths who had no mathematical training of
importance before they went to Cambridge. All their
instruction had been received during the three years of
their residence at the University. Now, I do not say
anything here about the merits or demerits of Cambridge
mathematical studies having been directed along a too
narrow groove, or about the presumed disadvantages of
ranging ca-ndidates . in strict order of merit, instead of
grouping them, as at Oxford, in classes, where their names
appear alphabetically arranged. All I am concerned with
here are the results; and these are most appropriate to
my argument. The youths start on their three years'
race as fairly as possible. They are then stimulated to
run by the most powerful inducements, namely, those of
competition, of honour, and of future wealth (for a good
fellowship is wealth) ; and at the end of the three years
they are examined most rigorously according to a; system
that they all understand and are equally well firepared
for. The examination lasts five and a half hours a day
for eight days. All the answers are carefully marked by
the examiners, who add up the marks at the end and
range the candidates in strict order of merit. The fair-
ness and thoroughness of Cambridge examinations have
never had a breath of suspicion cast upon them.

Unfortunately for my purposes, the marks are not
published. They are not even assigned on a uniform
system, since each examiner is permitted to employ his
own scale of marks ; but whatever scale he uses, the results
:as to proportional merit are the same. I am indebted to
a Cambridge examiner for a copy of his marks, in respect

16

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

to two examinations, in which the scales of marks were so
alike as to make it easy, by a slight proportional adjust-
ment, to compare the two together. This was, to a certain
degree, a confidential communication, so that it would be
improper for me to publish anything that would identify
the years to which these marks refer. I simply give them
as groups of figures, sufficient to show the- enormous
differences of merit. The lowest man in the list of honours
gains less than 300 marks; the lowest wrangler gains
about 1,-500 marks ; and the senior wrangler, in one of the
lists now before me, gained more than 7,500 marks. Con-
sequently, the lowest wrangler has more than five times
the merit of the lowest junior optime, and less than one-
fifth the merit of the senior wrangler.

Scale of merit among the men who obtain mathematical honours at
Cambridge.

The results of two years are thrown into a single table.

The total number of marks obtainable in each year was 17,000.

Numlier of marks obtained by
candidates.

Number of candidates in
tlie two years, taken
together, wlio obtained
those marks.

Under 500

24 1

500 to 1,000
1,000 to 1,500
1,500 to 2,000
2,000 to 2,500
2,500 to 3,000
3,000 to 3,500

74
38
21
11
8
11

3,500 to 4,000
4,000 to 4,500
4,500 to 5,000
5,000 to 5,500
5,500 to 6,000
6,000 to 6,500
6,500 to 7,000
7,000 to 7,500
7,500 to 8,000

5
2
1
3
1

1

'

20D

I have included in this table only the first 100 men in each year. The
omitted residue is too small to be important. I have omitted it lest, if the
precise numbers of honour men were stated, those numbers would have
served to identify the years. For reasons already given, I desire to afford
no data to serve that purpose.

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 17

The precise number of marks obtained by the senior
wrangler in the more remarkable of these two years was
7,634; by the second wrangler in the same year, 4,123 ;
and by the lowest man in the list of honours, only 237.
Consequently, the senior wrangler obtained nearly twice
as many marks as the second wrangler, and more than
thirty-two times as many as the lowest man. I have
received from another examiner the marks of a year in
which the senior wrangler was conspicuously eminent.
He obtained 9,422 marks, whilst the second in the same
year — whose merits were by no means inferior to those
of second wranglers in general — obtained only 5,642. The
man at the bottom of the same honour list had only 309
marks, or one-thirtieth the number of the senior wrangler.
I have some particulars of a fourth very remarkable year,
in which the senior wrangler obtained no less than ten
times as many marks as the second wrangler, in the
" problem paper." Now, I have discussed with practised
examiners the question of how far the numbers of marks
may be considered as proportionate to the mathematical
power of the candidate, and am assured they are strictly
proportionate as regards the lower places, but do not afford
lull justice to the highest. In other words, the senior
wranglers above mentioned had more than thirty, or thirty-
twa times the ability of the lowest men on the lists of
honours. They would be able to grapple with problems
more than thirty-two times as difficult ; or when dealing
with subjects of the same difficulty, but intelligible to
all, would comprehend them more rapidly in perhaps the
square root of that proportion. It is reasonable to expect
that marks would do some injustice to the very best men,
because a very large part of the time of the examination
is taken up by the mechanical labour of writing. When-
ever the thought of the candidate outruns his pen, he gains
no advantage from his excess of promptitude in conception.
I should, however, mention that some of the ablest men
have shown their superiority by comparatively little writing.
They find their way at once to the root of the difficulty in
the problems that are set, and, with a few clean, apposite,
powerful strokes, succeed in proving they can overthrow it,

c

18 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

and then they go on to another question. Every word
they write tells. Thus, the late Mr. H. Leslie Ellis, who
was a brilliant senior wrangler in 1840, and whose name
■is familiar to many generations of Cambridge men as a
prodigy of universal genius, did not even remain during
the full period in the examination room : his health was
weak, and he had to husband his strength.

The mathematical powers of the last man on the list of
honours, which are so low when compared with those of
a senior wrangler, are mediocre, or even above mediocrity,
when compared with the gifts of Englishmen generally.
Though the examination places 100 honour men above
him, it puts no less than 300 " poll men " below him.
Even if we go so far as to allow that 200 out of the 300
refuse to work hard enough to get honours, there will
remain 100 who, even if they worked hard, could not
get them. Every tutor knows how difficult it is to drive
abstract conceptions, even of the simplest kind, into the
brains of most people — how feeble and hesitating is their
mental grasp — how easily their brains are mazed — ^how
incapable they are of precision and soundness of know-
ledge. It often occurs to persons familiar with some
scientific subject to hear men and women of mediocre gifts
relate to one another what they have picked up about it
frona some lecture — say at the Royal Institution, where
they have sat for an hour listening with delighted atten-
tion to an admirably lucid account, illustrated by experi-
ments of the most perfect and beautiful character, in all
of which they expressed themselves intensely gratified
and highly instructed. It is positively painful to hear
what they say. Their recollections seem to be a mere
chaos of mist and misapprehension, to which some sort of
shape and organization has been given by the action of
their own pure fancy, altogether alien to what the lecturer
intended to convey. The average mental grasp even of
what is called a well-educated audience, will be found to
be ludicrously small when rigorously tested.

In stating the differences between man and ma,n, let it
not be supposed for a moment that mathematicians are
necessarily one-sided in their natural gifts. There are

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATI/R'AI GIFTS 19

numerous instances of the reverse, of whom the following
will be found, as instances of hereditary genius, in the
appendix to my chapter on "Science." I would espe-
cially name Leibnitz, as being universally gifted ; but
Ampke, Arago, Condorcet, and D'Alembert, were all of
them very far more than mere mathematicians. Nay,
since the range of examination at Cambridge is so ex-
tended as to include other subjects besides mathematics,
the differences of ability between the highest and lowest
of the successful candidates is j'et more glaring than what
I have already described. We still find, on the one
hand, mediocre men, whose whole energies are absorbed
in getting their 237 marks for mathematics ; and, on the
other hand, some few senior wranglers who are at the same
time high classical scholars and much more besides.
Cambridge has afforded such instances. Its lists of
classical honours are comparatively of recent date, but
other evidence is obtainable from earlier times of their
occurrence. Thus, Dr. George Butler, the Head Master
of Harrow for very many years, including the period
when Byron was a schoolboy (father of the present Head
Master, and of other sons, two of whom are also head
masters of great public schools), must have obtained
that classical office on account of his eminent classical
ability ; but Dr. Butler was also senior wrangler in 1794,
the year when Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst was second.
Both Dr. Kaye, the late Bishop of Lincoln, and Sir E.
Alderson, the late judge, were the senior wranglers and
the first classical prizemen of their respective years.
Since 1824, when the classical tripos was first established,
the late Mr. Goulburn (son of the Right Hon. H. Goulburn,
Chancellor of the Exchequer) was second wrangler in 1835,
and senior classic of the same year. But in more recent
times, the necessary labour of preparation, in order to
acquire the highest mathematical places, has become so
enormous that there has been a wider differentiation of
studies. There is no longer iime for a man to acquire
the necessary knowledge to succeed to the first place in
more than one subject. There are, therefore, no instances
of a man being absolutely first in both examinations, but

c 2

20 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

a few can be found of high eminence in both classics and
mathematics, as a reference to the lists published in the
"Cambridge Calendar" will show. The best of these
more recent degrees appears to be that of Dr. Barry, late
Principal of Cheltenham, and now Principal of King's
College, London (the son of the eminent architect, Sir
Charles Barry, and brother of Mr. Edward Barry, who
succeeded his father as architect). He was fourth
wrangler and seventh classic of his year.

In whatever way we may test ability, we arrive at
equally enormous intellectual differences. Lord Macaulay
{see under "Literature" for his remarkable kinships)
had one of the most tenacious of memories. He was able
to recall many pages of hundreds of volumes by various
authors, which he had acquired by simply reading them
over. An average man could not certainly carry in his
memory one thirty-second — ay, or one hundredth — part as
much as Lord Macaulay. The father of Seneca had one of
the greatest memories on record in ancient times {see
under " LITERATURE " for his kinships). Person, the Greek
scholar, was remarkable for this gift, and, I may add, the
"Person memory" was hereditary in that family. In
statesmanship, generalship, literature, science, poetry, art,
just the same enormous differences are found between
man and man ; and numerous instances recorded in this
book, will show in how small degree, eminence, either in
these or any other class of intellectual powers, can be con-
sidered as due to purely special powers. They are rather
to be considered in those instances as the result of con-
centrated efforts, made by men who are widely gifted.
People lay too much stress on apparent specialities, think-
ing over-rashly that, because a man is devoted to some
particular pursuit, he could not possibly have succeeded in
anything else. They might just as well say that, because a
youth had fallen desperately in love with a brunette, he could
not possibly have fallen in love with a blonde. He may or
may not have more natural liking for the former type of
beauty than the latter, but it is as probable as not that
the affair was mainly or wholly due to a general amorous-
ness of disposition. It is just the same with special

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 21

pursuits. A gifted man is often capricious and fickle
before he selects his occupation, but when it has been
chosen, he devotes himself to it with a truly passionate
ardour. After a man of genius has selected his hobby, and
so adapted himself to it as to seem unfitted for any other
occupation in life, and to be possessed of but one special
aptitude, I often notice, with admiration, how well he
bears himself when circumstances suddenly thrust him into
a strange position. He will display an insight into new con-
ditions, and a power of dealing with them, with which even
his most intimate friends were unprepared to accredit him.
Many a presumptuous fool has mistaken indifference and
neglect for incapacity ; and in trying to throw a man of
genius on ground where he was unprepared for attack, has
himself received a most severe and unexpected fall. I am
sure that no one who has had the privilege of mixing in
the society of the abler men of any great capital, or who
is acquainted with the biographies of the heroes of history,
can doubt the existence of grand human animals, of natures
pre-eminently noble, of individuals born to be kings of
men. I have been conscious of no slight misgiving that I
was committing a kind of sacrilege whenever, in the
preparation of materials for this book, I had occasion to
take the measurement of modern intellects vastly superior
to my own, or to criticise the genius of the most magni-
ficent historical specimens of our race. It was a process
that constantly recalled to me a once familiar sentiment
in bygone days of African travel, when I used to take
altitudes of the huge cliffs that domineered above me as
I travelled along their bases, or to map the mountainous
landmarks of unvisited tribes, that loomed in faint grandeur
beyond ray actual horizon.

I have not cared to occupy myself much with
people whose gifts are below the average, but they
would be an interesting study. The number of idiots
and imbeciles among, the twenty million inhabitants of
England and Wales is approximately estimated at
50,000, or as 1 in 400. Dr. Seguin, a great French
authority on these matters, states that more than thirty
per cent, of idiots and imbeciles, put under suitable

22 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

instruction, have been taught to conform to social and
moral law, and rendered capable of order, of good feel-
ing, and of working like the third of an average man.
He says that more than forty per cent, have become
capable of the ordinary transactions- of life, under friendly
control ; of understanding moral and social abstractions,
and of working like two-thirds of a man. And, lastly,
that from twenty-five to thirty per cent, come nearer
and nearer to the standard of manhood, till some of
them will defy the scrutiny of good judges, when com-
pared with ordinary young men and women. In the
order next above idiots and imbeciles are a large number
of milder cases scattered among private families and
kept out of sight, the existence of whom is, however,
well known to relatives and friends ; they are too silly
to take a part in general society, but are easily amused
with . some trivial, harmless occupation. Then comes
a class of whom the Lord- Dundreary of the famous play-
may be considered a representative; and so, proceeding
through successive grades, we gradually ascend to
mediocrity. I know two good ■ instances - of hereditary
silliness short of imbecility, and have reason to believe
I could easily obtain a large number of similar facts.

To conclude, the range of mental power between —
I will not say the highest Caucasian and the lowest
savage — but between the greatest and least of English
intellects, is enormous. There is a continuity of natural
ability reaching from one knows not what height, and
descending to one can hardly say what depth. I propose
in this chapter to range men according to their natural
abilities, putting them into classes separated by equal
degrees of merit, and to show the relative number of
individuals included in the several classes. Perhaps some
person might be inclined to make an offhand guess
that the number of men included in the several classes
would be pretty equal. If he thinks so, I can assure him
he is most egregiously mistaken.

The method I shall employ . for discovering all this
is an application of the very curious theoretical law
of " deviation from an average." First, I will explain.

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 23

the law, and then"! will show that the production of
natural intellectual gifts comes justly within its scope.

The law is an exceedingly general one. M. Quetelet,
the Astronomer-Royal of Belgium, and the greatest
authority on vital and social statistics, has largely used
it in his inquiries. He has also constructed numerical
tables, by which the necessary calculations can be easily
made, whenever it is desired to have recourse to the
law. Those who wish to learn more than I have space
to relate, should consult his work, which is a very read-
able octavo volume, and deserves to be far better known
to statisticians than it appears to be. Its title is " Letters
on Probabilities," translated by Downes. Layton and Co.
London : 1849.

So much has been published in recent years about
statistical deductions, that I am sure the reader will
be prepared to assent freely to the following hypothetical
case: — Suppose a. large island inhabited by a single
race, who intermarried freely, and who had lived for
many generations under constant conditions ; then the
average height of the male adults of that population
would xmdoubtedly be the same year after year. Also
— still arguing from the experience of modern statistics,
which are found to give constant results in far less
carefully-guarded examples — we should undoubtedly find,
year after year, the same proportion maintained between
the number of men of different heights. I mean, if
the average stature was found to be sixty-six inches,
and if it was also found in any one year that 100 per
million exceeded seventy-eight inches, the same proportion
of 100 per million would be closely maintained in all other
years. An equal constancy of proportion would be main-
tained between any other limits of height we pleased to
specify, as between seventy-one and seventy-two inches ; be-
tween seventy-two and seventy-three inches ; and so on.
Statistical experiences are so invariably confirmatory of
what I have stated would probably be the case, as to
make it unnecessary to describe analogous instances.
Now, at this point, the law of deviation from an average
steps in. It shows that the number per million whose

24

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

heights range between seventy-one and seventy-two inches
(or between any other limits we please to name) can
be predicted from the previous datum of the average,
and of any one other fact, such as that of 100 per
million exceeding seventy-eight inches.

The appended diagram will make this more intelligible.
Suppose a million of the men to stand in turns, with their

backs against a vertical

JtR£ABOVS THIS LIKE

Scale

of
feet

AVER/H:£ HEIGHT

ISO PER MILLION

board of sufficient height,
and their heights to be
dotted off upon it. The
board would then present
the appearance shown in
the diagram. The line
of average height is that
jooRERmLLim _ which divides the dots

into two equal parts, and
stands, in the case we
have assumed, at the
height of sixty-six inches.
M,EBEL<m-maLim The dots wiU be found to

be ranged so symmetric-
ally on either side of the
line of average, that the
lower half of the diagram
will be almost a precise
reflection of the upper.
Next, let a hundred dots
be counted from above
downwards, and let a line
be drawn below them.
According to the con-
ditions, this line will stand at the height of seventy-eight
inches. Using the data afforded by these two lines, it is
possible, by the help of the law of deviation from an
average, to reproduce, with extraordinary closeness, the
entire system of dots on the board.

M. Quetelet gives tables in which the uppermost line,
instead of cutting off 100 in a million, cuts off only one in
a million. He divides the intervals between that line and

ACCORDING TO THEIK NATURAL GIFTS 25

the line of average, into eighty equal divisions, and gives
the mimber of dots that fall within each of those divisions.
It is easy, by the help of his tables, to calculate what
would occur under any other system of classification we
pleased to adopt.

This law of deviation from an average is perfectly general
in its application. Thus, if the marks had been made by
bullets fired at a horizontal line stretched in front of the
target, they would have been distributed according to the
same law. Wherever there is a large number of similar
events, each due to the resultant influences of the same
variable conditions, two effects will follow. First, the
average value of those events will be constant ; and,
secondly, the deviations of the several events from the
average, will be governed by this law (which is, in prin-
ciple, the same as that which governs runs of luck at a
gaming-table).

The nature of the conditions affecting the several events
must, I say, be the same. It clearly would not be proper
to combine the heights of men belonging to two dissimilar
races, in the expectation that the compound results would
be governed by the same constants. A union of two dis-
similar systems of dots would produce the same kind of
Confusion as if half the bullets fired at a target had been
directed to one mark, and the other half to another mark.
Nay, an examination of the dots would show to a person,
ignorant of what had occurred, that such had been the
case, and it would be possible, by aid of the law, to dis-
entangle two or any moderate number of superimposed
series of marks. The law may, therefore, be used as a
most trustworthy criterion, whether or no the events of
which an average has been taken, are due to the same or
to dissimilar classes of conditions.

I selected the hypothetical case of a race of men living
on an island and freely intermarrying, to ensure the con-
ditions under which they were all supposed to live, being
uniform in character. It will now be my aim to show there
is sufficient uniformity in the inhabitants of the British
Isles to bring them fairly within the grasp of this law.

For this purpose, I first call attention to an example

26

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

given in Quetelet's book. It is of the measurements of the
circumferences of the chests of a large number of Scotch
soldiers. The Scotch are by no means a strictly uniform
race, nor are they exposed to identical conditions. They
are a mixture of Celts, Danes, Anglo-Saxons, and others,
in various proportions, the Highlanders being almost purely
Celts. On the other hand, these races, though diverse in
origin, are not very dissimilar in character. Consequently,
it will be found that their deviations from the average
follow theoretical computations with remarkable. accuracy.
The instance is as follows. M. Quetelet obtained his facts
from the thirteenth volume of the Edinburgh Medical
Journal, where the measurements are given in respect to
5,738 soldiers, the results being grouped in order of mag-
nitude, proceeding by differences of one inch. Professor
Quetelet compares these results with those that his tables
give, and here is the result. The marvellous accordance
between fact and' theory must strike the i^ost unpractised
eye. I should say that, for the sake of convenience, both
the measurements and calculations have been reduced to
per thousandths : —

Number of

Number of

Number of

Number of

the chest in

1,000 hy

1,000 by

the chest in

1,000 by

men per
1,000 by

experience.

calculation.

experience.

calculation.

33

5

7

41

1,628

- 1,675

34

31

29

42

1,148

1,096

35

141

110

43

. 645

560

36

322

323

44

160

221

37

732

732

45

87

69

38

1,305

1,333

46

38

16

39

1,867

1,838

47

7

3

40

1,882

1,987

48

2

1

I will now take a case where there is a grea^ter dis-
similarity in the elements of which the average has been
taken. It is the height of 100,000 French conscripts.
There is fully as much variety in the French as in the
English, for it is not very many generations since France

ACCORDINCf-TO ;THEIR NATURAL GIFTS

?7

was 'divided into, completely independent l^iiigdoms.
Among its peculiar races are those of Normandy, Brit-
tany, Alsatia, Provence, Bearne, Auvergne — each with
their special characteristics ; yet the following table shows
a most striking agreement between the results of experience
compared with those derived by calculation, from a purely
theoretical hypothesis : —

Height of Men.

Number of JVIen.

Measured.

Calculaterl.

Inches.

Under 61-8
61-8 to 62-9
62-9 to 63-9
63-9 to 65-0
65-0 to 66-1
66-1 to 67-1
67-1 to 68-2
68-2 to 69-3
Above 69-3

28,620

11,580

13,990

' 14,410

11,410

8,780

5,530

3,190

2,490

26,345
13,182
14,502
13,982
11,803
- 8,725
- 5,527
3,187
2,645

The gi-eatest differences are in the lowest ranks. They
include the men who were rejected from being too short
for the army. M. Quetelet boldly ascribes these differ-
ences to the effect of fraudulent returns. It certainly
seems that men have been improperly taken out of the
second rank and put into the first, in order to exempt
them from service. Be this as it may, the coincidence of
fact with theory is, in this instance also, quite close enough
to serve my purpose.

I argue from the results obtained from Frenchmen and
from Scotchmen, that, if we had measurements of the
adult males in the British Isles, we should find those
measurements to range in close accordance with the law
of deviation from an average, although our population is
as much mingled as I described that of Scotland to have
been, and although Ireland is mainly peopled with Celts.

28 CLASSIFICATION" OF MEN

Now, if this be the case with stature, then it will be
true as regards every other physical feature — as circum-
ference of head, size of brain, weight of grey matter,
number of brain fibres, &c. ; and thence, by a step on
which no physiologist will hesitate, as regards mental
capacity.

This is what I am driving at — that analogy clearly shows
there must be a fairly constant average mental capacity in
the inhabitants of the British Isles, and that the deviations
from that average — upwards towards genius, and down-
wards towards stupidity — must follow the law that governs
deviations from all true averages.

I have, however, done somewhat more than rely on
analogy, by discussing the results of those examinations in
which the candidates had been derived from the same
classes. Most persons have noticed the lists of successful
competitors for various public appointments that are
published from time to time in the newspapers, with the
marks gained by each candidate attached to his name.
These lists contain far too few names to fall into such
beautiful accordance with theory, as was the case with the
Scotch soldiers. There are rarely more than 100 names
in any one of these examinations, while the chests of
no less than 5,700 Scotchnien were measured. I cannot
justly combine the marks of several independent exami-
nations into one fagot, for I understand that different
examiners are apt to have different figures of merit ; so
each examination was analysed separately. The following
is a calculation I made on the examination last before me ;
it will do as well as any other. It was for admission into
the Royal Military CoJlege at Sandhurst, December 1868.
The marks obtained were clustered most thickly about
3,000, so I take that number as representing the average
ability of the candidates. From this datum, and from the
fact that no candidate obtained more than 6,500 marks,
I computed the column B in the following table, by
the help of Quetelet's numbers. It will be seen that
column B accords with column A quite as closely as the
small number of persons examined could have led us to
expect.

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS

29

Number of Candidates who obtained

those marks.

Number of marks obtained

by the Candidates.

A.

B.

According to fact.

According

! to theory.

6,500 and above

\

5,800 to 6,500

1

1

5,100 to 5,800

3

■ 5

4,400 to 5,100

6

8

3,700 to 4,400

11

^3

13

72

3,000 to 3,700

22

16

2,300 to 3,000

22

16

1,600 to 2,300

8 )

13 j

1,100 to 1,600 C

Either did not

1 ^

400 to 1,100 J

venture to com-

\ 5

Below 400 [

pete, or were
plucked.

J ^

The symmetry of the descending branch has been rudely
spoilt by the conditions stated at the foot of column A.
There is, therefore, little room for doubt, if everybody in
England had to work up some subject and then to pass
before examiners who employed similar figures of merit,
that their marks would be found to range, according to the
law of deviation from an average, just as rigorously as the
heights of French conscripts, or the circumferences of the
chests of Scotch soldiers.

The number of grades into which we may divide ability
is purely a matter of option. We may consult our con-
venience by sorting Enghshmen into a few large classes, or
into many small ones. I will select a system of classi-
fication that shall be easily comparable with the numbers
of eminent men, as determined in the previous chapter.
We have seen that 250 men per million become eminent ;
accordingly, I have so contrived the classes in the following
table that the two highest, F and G, together with X
(which includes all cases beyond G, and which are
unclassed), shall amount to about that number — namely
to 248 per million : —

30

CLASSlriCATION OF MEN

CLASSIFICATION OF MEN

ACCORDING TO

THBIB

NATURAL GIFTS.

Grades of natural
ability, separated

Numbers of men comprised in the several gi'ades of natural ability, whether
in respect to tlieii- general powers, or to special aptitudes.

Propor-
tionate,
viz.
one in

In each

million

of the

same age.

In total male population of tlie United Kingdom, say
15 millions, of the'underjnentioned ages ; —

Below
average.

Above
average.

20—30

30—40

40—50

60—60

63-70

70—80

77,000

48,000

19,000

4,700

729

70

4

a
1)
c
d
e
f
g

X

all grades

below

g

A
B

D
E
F
G

X

all grades

above

G

4

6

16

64
: 413
4,800

7d,ooo

1,000,000

256,791

161,279

6?, 663

15,696

2,423

1 233

: 14

1

661,000

409,000

161,000

89,800

6,100

690

36

3

496,000

312,000

123,000

30,300

4,700

460

27

2

891,000

246,000

97,000

23,900

3,700

355

21

. 2

761,000
1,522,000

268,000

168,000

66,000

16,400

2,620

243

16

2

171,000

107,000

42,000

10,400

1,600

185

9

On either side of ■
Total, both sides

iverage .

500,000
1,000,000

1,268,000
2,636,000

964,000
1,928,000

621,000
1,042,000

332,000
664,000

149,000
298,000

The proportions of men living at ditferent ages are calculated from the
proportions that are true for England and Wales. (Gensusl861, Appendix,
p. 107.)

Example. — The class F contains 1 in every 4,300 men. In other words,
there are 233 of that class in each million of men. The same is true of
class f. In the whole United Kingdom there are 590 men of class F (and
the same numher of f) hetween the ages of 20 and 30 ; 450 between the
ages of 30 and 40 ; and so on.

It will, I trust, be clearly understood that the numbers
of men in the several classes in my table depend on no
uncertain hypothesis. They are determined by the assured
law of deviations from an average. It is an absolute fact
that if we pick out of each million the one man who is
naturally the ablest, and also the one man who is the
most stupid, and divide the remaining 999,998 men into
fourteen classes, the average ability in each being separated
from that of its neighbours by rqual grades, then ■ the
numbers in each of those classes will, on the average of
many millions, be as is stated in the table. The table may

ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 31

be applied to special, just as truly as to general ability.
It would be true for every examination that brought out
natural gifts, whether held in painting, in music, or in
statesmanship. The proportions between the different
classes would be identical in all these cases, although the
classes would be made up of different individuals, according
as the examination differed in its purport.

It will be seen that more than half of each million
is contained in the two mediocre classes a and A ; the
four mediocre classes a, b, A, B, contain more than four-
fifths, and the six mediocre classes more than nineteen-
twentieths of the entire population. Thus, the rarity of
commanding ability, and the vast abundance of mediocrity,
is no accident, but follows of necessity, from the very nature
of these things.

The meaning of the word " mediocrity " admits of little
doubt. It defines the standard of intellectual power found
in rnost provincial gatherings, because the attractions of a
more stirring life in the metropolis and elsewhere, are a;pt
to draw away the abler classes of men, and the silly and
the imbecile do not take a part in the gatherings. Hence,
the residuum that forms the bulk of the general society
of small provincial places, is commonly very pure in its
mediocrity.

The class C possesses abilities a trifle higher than those
commonly possessed by the foreman of an ordinary jury.
D includes the mass of men who obtain the ordinary
prizes of life. E is a stage higher. Then we reach F,
the lowest of those yet superior classes of intellect, with
which this volume is chiefly concerned.

On descending the scale, we find by the time we have
reached f, that we are already among the idiots and im-
beciles. We have seen in p. 21, that there are 400 idiots
and imbeciles, to every million of persons living in this
country ; but that 30 per cent, of their number, appear to
be light cases, to whom the name of idiot is inappropriate.
There will remain 280 true idiots and imbeciles, to every
million of our population. This ratio coincides very closely
with the requirements of class f. No doubt a certain pro-
portion of them are idiotic owing to some fortuitous cause,

32 CLASSIFICATION ACCOKDING TO GIFTS '

which may interfere with the working of a naturally good
brain, much as a bit of dirt may cause a first-rate chrono-
meter to keep worse time than an ordinary watch. But
I presume, from the usual smallness of head and absence
of disease among these persons, that the proportion of
accidental idiots cannot be very large.

Hence we arrive at the undeniable, but unexpected
conclusion, that eminently gifted men are raised as much
above mediocrity as idiots are depressed below it ; a fact
that is calculated to considerably enlarge our ideas of the
enormous differences of intellectual gifts between man
and man.

I presume the class F of dogs, and others of the more
intelligent sort of animals, is nearly commensurate with
the f of the human race, in respect to meniory and powers
of reason. Certainly the class G of such animals is far
superior to the g of humankind.

COMPARISON OF THE TWO CLASSIFICATIONS

COMPARISON OF THE TWO
CLASSIFICATIONS.

Is reputation a fair test of natural ability ? It is the only
one I can employ — am I justified in using it ? How much
of a man's success is due to his opportunities, how much
to his natural power of intellect ?

This is a very old question, on which a great many
commonplaces have been uttered that need not be repeated
here. I will confine myself to a few considerations, such
as seem to me amply adequate to prove what is wanted
for my argument.

Let it clearly be borne in mind, what I mean by repu-
tation and ability. By reputation, I mean the opinion oi
contemporaries, revised by posterity — the favourable result
of a critical analysis of each man's character, by many
biographers. I do not mean high social or official position,
nor such as is implied by being the mere lion of a London
season ; but I speak of the reputation of a leader of
opinion, of an originator, of a man to whom the world
deliberately acknowledges itself largely indebted.

By natural ability, I mean those qualities of intellect
and disposition, which urge and qualify a man to perform
acts that lead to reputation. I do not mean capacity
without zeal, nor zeal without capacity, nor even a com-
bination of both of them, without an adequate power of
doing a great deal of very laborious work. But I mean
a nature which, when left to itself, will, urged by an in-
herent stimulus, climb the path that leads to eminence,
and has strength to reach the summit — one which, if
hindered or thwarted, will fret and strive until the hin-

D

34 COMPARISON OF THE

drance is overcome, and it is again free to follow its
labour-loving instinct. It is almost a contradiction in
terms, to doubt that such men will generally become emi-
nent. On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence in
this volume to show that few have won high reputations
without possessing these peculiar gifts. It follows that
the men who achieve eminence, and those who are naturally
capable, are, to a large extent, identical.

The particular meaning in which I employ the word
ability, does not restrict my argument from a wider appli-
cation ; for, if I succeed in showing — as I undoubtedly
shall do — that the concrete triple event, of ability combined
with zeal and with capacity for hard labour, is inherited,
much more will there be justification for believing that any
one of its three elements, whether it be ability, or zeal, or
capacity for labour, is similarly a gift of inheritance.

I believe, and shall do my best to show, that, if the
" eminent " men of any period, had been changelings when
babies, a very fair proportion of those who survived and
retained their health up to fifty years of age, would, not-
withstanding their altered circumstances have equally
risen to eminence. Thus — to take a strong case — it is
incredible that any combination of circumstances, could
have repressed Lord Brougham to the level of undis-
tinguished mediocrity.

The arguments on which I rely are as follow. I will
limit their application for the present to men of the pen
and to artists. First, it is a fact, that numbers of men rise,
before they are middle-aged, from the humbler ranks of
life to that worldly position, in which it is of no importance
to their future career, how their youth has been passed.
They have overcome their hindrances, and thus start fair
with others more fortunately reared, in the subsequent race
of life. A boy who is to be carefully educated is sent to
a good school, where he confessedly acquires little useful
information, but where he is taught the art of learning.
The man of whom I have been speaking has contrived
to acquire the same art in a school of adversity. Both
stand on equal terms, when they have reached mature life.
They compete for the same prizes, measure their strength
by efforts in the same direction, and their relative successes

TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 35

are thenceforward due to their relative natural gifts. There
are many such men in the " eminent " class, as biographies
abundantly show. Now, if the hindrances to success were
very great, we should expect all who surmounted them
to be prodigies of genius. The hindrances would form a
system of natural selection, by repressing all whose gifts
were below a certain very high level. But what is the
case ? We find very many who have risen from the ranks,
who are by no means prodigies of genius ; many who have
no claim to " eminence," who have risen easily in spite of
all obstacles. The hindrances vmdoubtedly form a system
of natural selection that represses mediocre men, and even
men of pretty fair powers — in short, the classes below D ;
but many of D succeed, a great many of E, aad I believe
a very large majority of those above.

If a man is gifted with vast intellectual ability, eagerness
to work, and power of working, I cannot comprehend how
such a man should be repressed. The world is always
tormented with difficulties waiting to be solved — struggling
with ideas and feelings, to which it can give no adequate
expression. If, then, there exists a man capable of solving
those difficulties, or of giving a voice to those pent-up
feelings, he is sure to be welcomed with universal accla-
mation. We may almost say that he has only to put his
pen to paper, and the thing is done. I am here speaking
of the very first-class men — prodigies — one in a million, or
one in ten millions, of whom numbers will be found described
in this volume, as specimens of hereditary genius.

Another argument to prove, that the hindrances of
English social life, are not effectual in repressing high
ability is, that the number of eminent men in England,
is as great as in other countries where fewer hindrances
exist. Culture is far more widely spread in America,
than with us, and the education of their middle and
lower classes far more advanced ; but, for all that,
America most certainly does not beat us in first-class
works of literature, philosophy, or art. The higher kind
of books, even of the most modern date, read in America,
are principally the work of Englishmen. The Americans
have an immense amount of the newspaper-article-writer,
or of the member-of-congress stamp of ability; but the

D 2

36 COMPARISON OF THE

number of their really eminent authors is more limited
even than with us. I argue that, if the hindrances to the
rise of genius, were removed from English society as com-
pletely as they have been removed from that of America,
we should not become materially richer in highly eminent
men.

People seem to have the idea that the way to eminence
is one of great self-denial, from which there are hourly
temptations to diverge : in which a man can be kept in
his boyhood, only by a schoolmaster's severity or a jaarent's
incessant watchfulness, and in after life by the attrac-
tions of fortunate friendships and other favourable cir-
cumstances. This is true enough of the great majority
of men, but it is simply not true of the generality of
those who have gained great reputations. Such men,
biographies show to be haunted and driven by an in-
cessant instinctive craving for intellectual work. If
forcibly withdrawn from the path that leads towards
eminence, they will find their way back to it, as surely
as a lover to his mistress. They do not work for the
sake of eminence, but to satisfy a natural craving for
brain work, just as athletes cannot endure repose on
account of their muscular irritability, which insists upon
exercise. It is very unhkely that any conjunction of cir-
cumstances, should supply a stimulus to brain work,
commensurate with what these men carry in their own
constitutions. The action of external stimuli must be
uncertain and intermittent, owing to their very nature ;
the disposition abides. It keeps a man ever employed —
now wrestling with his difficulties, now brooding over his
immature ideas — and renders him a quick and eager
listener to innumerable, almost inaudible teachings, that
others less keenly on the watch, are sure to miss.

These considerations lead to my third argument. I have
shown that social hindrances cannot impede men of high
ability, from becoming eminent. I shall now maintain that
social advantages are incompetent to give that status to
a man of moderate ability. It would be easy to point
out several men of fair capacity, who have been pushed
forward by all kinds of help, who are ambitious, and exert
themselves to the utmost, but who completely fail in

TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 37

attaining eminence. If great peers, they may be lord-
lieutenants of counties; if they belong to great county
families, they may become influential members of parlia-
ment and local notabilities. When they die, they leave a
blank for a while in a large circle, but there is no West-
minster Abbey and no public mourning for them^ — perhaps
barely a biographical notice in the columns of the daily
papers.

It is difficult to specify two large classes of men, with
equal social advantages, in one of which they have high
hereditary gifts, while in the other they have not. I must
not compare the sons of eminent men with those of non-
eminent, because much which I should ascribe to breed,
others might ascribe to parental encouragement and ex-
ample. Therefore, I will compare the sons of eminent
men with the adopted sons of Popes and other dignitaries
of the Roman Catholic Church. The practice of nepotism
among ecclesiastics is universal. It consists in their giving
those social helps to a nephew, or other more distant
relative, that ordinary people give to their children.
Now, I shall show abundantly in the course of this book,
that the nephew of an eminent m.an has far less chance
of becoming eminent than a son, and that a more remote
kinsman has far less chance than a nephew. We may
therefore make a very fair comparison, for the purposes of
my argument, between the success of the sons of eminent
men and that of the nephews or more distant relatives,
who stand in the place of sons to the high unmarried
ecclesiastics of the Romish Church. If social help is really
of the highest importance, the nephews of the Popes will
attain eminence as frequently, or nearly so, as the sons of
other eminent men ; otherwise, they will not.

Are, then, the nephews, &c., of the Popes, on the whole,
as highly distinguished as are the sons of other equally
eminent men ? I answer, decidedly not. There have been
a few Popes who were offshoots of illustrious races, such as
that of the Medici, but in the enormous majority of cases
the Pope is the ablest member of his family. I do not
profess to have worked up the kinships of the Italians
with any especial care, but I have seen amply enough of
them, to justify me in saying that the individuals whose

38 COMPARISON OF THE

advancement has been due to nepotism, are curiously un-
distinguished. The very common combination of an able
son and an eminent parent, is not matched, in the case
of high Romish ecclesiastics, by an eminent nephew and
an eminent uncle. The social helps are the same, but
hereditary gifts are wanting in the latter case.

To recapitulate : I have endeavoured to show in respect
to literary and artistic eminence —

1. That men who are gifted with high abilities — even
men of class E — easily rise through all the obstacles caused
by inferiority of social rank.

2. Countries where there are fewer hindrances than in
England, to a poor man rising in life, produce a much
larger proportion of persons of culture, but not of what I
call eminent men.

3. Men who are largely aided by social advantages, are
unable to achieve eminence, unless they are endowed with
high natural gifts.

It may be well to add a few supplementary, remarks on
the small effects of a good education on a mind of the
highest order. A youth of abilities G, and X, is almost
independent of ordinary school education. He does not
want a master continually at his elbow to explain diffi-
culties and select suitable lessons. On the contrary, he is
receptive at every pore. He learns from passing hints,
with a quickness and thoroughness that others cannot
comprehend. He is omnivorous of intellectual work,
devouring a vast deal more than he can utilize, but ex-
tracting a small percentage of nutriment, that makes,
in the aggregate, an enormous supply. The best care
that a master can take of such a boy is to leave him
alone, just directing a little here and there, and checking
desultory tendencies.

It is a mere accident if a man is placed in his youth in
the profession for which he has the most special vocation.
It will consequently be remarked in my short biographical
notices, that the most illustrious men have frequently
broken loose from the life prescribed by their parents, and
followed, careless of cost, the paramount dictation of their
own natures : in short, they educate themselves. D'Alem-
bert is a striking instance of this kind of self-reliance. He

TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 39

was a foundling (afterwards shown to be well bred as
respects ability), and put out to nurse as a pauper baby,
to the wife of a poor glazier. The child's indomitable
tendency to the higher studies, could not be repressed by
his foster-mother's ridicule and dissuasion, nor by the
taunts of his schoolfellows, nor by the discouragements of
his schoolmaster, who was incapable of appreciating him,
nor even by the reiterated deep disappointment of finding
that his ideas, which he knew to be original, were not
novel, but long previously discovered by others. Of course,
we should expect a boy of this kind, to undergo ten or
more years of apparently hopeless strife, but we should
equally expect him to succeed at last ; and D'Alembert
did succeed in attaining the first rank of celebrity, by the
time he was twenty-four. The reader has only to turn
over the pages of my book, to find abundant instances of
this emergence from obscurity, in spite of the utmost
discouragement in early youth.

A prodigal nature commonly so prolongs the period
when a man's receptive faculties are at their keenest, that
a faulty education in youth, is readily repaired in after
life. The education of Watt, the great mechanician, was
of a merely elementary character. During his youth and
manhood he was engrossed with mechanical specialities.
It was not till he became advanced in years, that he had •
leisure to educate himself, and yet by the time he was an
old man, he had become singularly well-read and widely
and accurately informed. The scholar who, in the eyes of
his contemporaries and immediate successors, made one of
the greatest reputations, as such, that any man has ever
made, was Julius Csesar Scaliger. His youth was, I be-
lieve, entirely unlettered. He was in the army until he
was twenty-nine, and then he led a vagrant professional
life, trying everything and sticking to nothing. At length
he fixed himself upon Greek. His first publications were
at the age of forty-seven, and between that time and the
period of a somewhat early death, he earned his remark-
able reputation, only exceeded by that of his son. Boy-
hood and youth — the period between fifteen and twenty-
two years of age, which afford to the vast majority of men,
the only period for the acquirement of intellectual facts

40 COMPAEISON OF THE

and habits — are just seven years — neither more nor less
important than other years — in the lives of men of the
highest order. People are too apt to complain of their
imperfect education, insinuating that they would have done
great things if they had been more fortunately circum-
stanced in youth. But if their power of learning is
materially diminished by the time they have discovered
their want of knowledge, it is very probable that their
abilities are not of a very high description, and that, how-
ever well they might have been educated, they would
have succeeded but little better.

Even if a man be long unconscious of his powers,
an opportunity is sure to occur — they occur over and
over again to every man — that will discover them. He
will then soon make up for past arrears, and outstrip
competitors with very many years' start, in the
race of life. There is an obvious analogy between
the man of brains and the man of muscle, in the
unmistakable way in which they may discover and
assert their claims to superiority over less gifted, but
far better educated, competitors. An average sailor
chmbs rigging, and an average Alpine guide scrambles
along cliffs, with a facility that seems like magic to a
man who has been reared away from ships and mountains.
But if he have extraordinary gifts, a very little trial
will reveal them, and he will rapidly make up for his
arrears of education. A born gymnast would soon,
in his turn, astonish the sailors by his feats. Before
the voyage was half over, he would outrun them like
an escaped monkey. I have witnessed an instance of
this myself. Every summer, it happens that some
young English tourist who had never previously planted
his foot on crag or ice, succeeds in Alpine work to a
marvellous degree.

Thus far, I have spoken only of literary men and
artists, who, however, form the bulk of the 250 per
million, that attain to eminence. The reasoning that
is true for them, requires large quahfications when
applied to statesmen and commanders. Unquestionably,
the most illustrious statesmen and commanders belong'
to say the least, to the classes F and G of abiUty;

TWO CLASSIFICATIONS. 41

but it does not at all follow that an English cabinet
minister, if he be a great territorial lord, should belong
to those classes, or even to the two or three below them.
Social advantages have enormous power in bringing a man
into so prominent a position as a statesman, that it is
impossible to refuse him the title of "eminent," though
it may be more than probable that if he had been changed
in his cradle, and reared in obscurity he would have
lived and died without emerging from humble life. Again,
we have seen that a union of three separate qualities —
intellect, zeal, and power of work — are necessary to
raise men from the ranks. Only two of these qualities,
in a remarkable degree, namely intellect and power of
work, are required by a man who is pushed into public
life ; because when he is once there, the interest is so
absorbing, and the competition so keen, as to supply the
necessary stimulus to an ordinary mind. Therefore, many
men who have succeeded as statesmen, would have been
nobodies had they been born in a lower rank of life : they
would have needed zeal to rise. Talleyrand would have
passed his life in the same way as other grand seigneurs,
if he had not been ejected from his birthright, by a family
council, on account of his deformity, and thrown into the
vortex of the French Revolution. The furious excitement
of the game overcame his inveterate indolence, and he
developed into the foremost man of the period, after
Napoleon and Mirabeau. As for sovereigns, they belong
to a peculiar category. The qualities most suitable to the
ruler of a great nation, are not such as lead to eminence
in private life. Devotion to particular studies, obstinate
perseverance, geniality and frankness in social relations, are
important qualities to make a man rise in the world, but
they are unsuitable to a sovereign. He has to view many
interests and opinions with an equal eye ; to know how
to yield his favourite ideas to popular pressure, to be
reserved in his friendships and able to stand alone. On
the other hand, a sovereign does not greatly need the
intellectual powers that are essential to the rise of a
common man, because the best brains of the country
are at his service. Consequently, I do not busy myself in
this volume with the families of merely able sovereigns

42 COMPARISON OF THE

only with those few whose miUtary and administrative capa-
city is acknowledged to have been of the very highest order.

As regards commanders, the qualities that raise a man
to a peerage, may be of a peculiar kind, such as would not
have raised him to eminence in ordinary times. Strategy
is as much a speciality as chess-playing, and large practice
is required to develop it. It is difficult to see how strate-
gical gifts, combined with a hardy constitution, dashing
courage, and a restless disposition, can achieve eminence in
times of peace. These qualities are more likely to attract
a man to the hunting-field, if he have enough money ; or
if not, to make him an unsuccessful speculator. It con-
sequently happens that generals of high, but not the very
highest order, such as Napoleon's marshals and Cromwell's
generals, are rarely found to have eminent kinsfolk. Very
different is the case, with the most illustrious commanders.
They are far more than strategists and men of restless
dispositions ; they would have distinguished themselves
under any circumstances. Their kinships are most re-
markable, as will be seen in my chapter on commanders,
which includes the names of Alexander, Scipio, Hannibal,
Csesar, Marlborough, Cromwell, the Princes of Nassau,
Wellington, and Napoleon.

Precisely the same remarks are applicable to demagogues.
Those who rise to the surface and play a prominent part
in the transactions of a troubled period, must have courage
and force of character, but they need not have high in-
tellectual powers. Nay, it is more appropriate that the
intellects of such men should be narrow and one-sided,
and their dispositions moody and embittered. These are
not qualities that lead to eminence in ordinary times.
Consequently, the families of such men, are mostly un-
known to fame. But the kinships of popular leaders of
the highest order, as of the two Gracchi, of the two
Arteveldes, and of Mirabeau, are illustrious.

I may mention a class of cases that strikes me forcibly
as a proof,_ that a sufficient power of command to lead to
eminence in troublous times, is much less unusual than is
commonly supposed, and that it lies neglected in the course
of ordinary Hfe. In beleaguered towns, as, for example,
during the great Indian mutiny, a certain type of character

TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 43

very frequently made its appearance. People rose into
notice who had never previously distinguished themselves,
and subsided into their former way of life, after the occa-
sion for exertion was over ; while during the continuance
of danger and misery, they were the heroes of their situa-
tion. They were cool in danger, sensible in council, cheer-
ful under prolonged suffering, humane to the wounded and
sick, encouragers of the faint-hearted. Such people were
formed to shine only under exceptional circumstances.
They had the advantage of possessing too tough a fibre to
be crushed by anxiety and physical misery, and perhaps
in consequence of that very toughness, they required a
stimulus of the sharpest kind, to goad them to all the
exertions of which they were capable.

The result of what I have said, is to show that in
statesmen and commanders, mere " eminence " is by no
means a satisfactory criterion of such natural gifts as
would make a man distinguished under whatever circum-
stances he had been reared. On the other hand, states-
men of a high order, and commanders of the very highest,
who overthrow all opponents, must be prodigiously gifted.
The reader himself must judge the cases quoted in proof
of hereditary gifts, by their several merits. I have
endeavoured to speak of none but the most illustrious
names. It would have led to false conclusions, had I taken a
larger number, and thus descended to a lower level of merit.

In conclusion, I see no reason to be dissatisfied with the
conditions of accepting high reputation as a very fair test
of high ability. The nature of the test would not have
been altered, if an attempt had been made to readjust each
man's reputation according to his merits, because this
is what every biographer does. If I had possessed the
critical power of a Ste. Beuve, I should have merely thrown
into literature another of those numerous expressions of
opinion, by the aggregate of which all reputations are built.

To conclude : I feel convinced that no man can achieve
a very high reputation without being gifted with very high
abilities ; and I trust that reason has been given for the
belief, that few who possess these very high abilities can
fail in achieving eminence.

44 NOTATION

NOTATION

, I ENTREAT my readers not to be frightened at the
first sight of the notation I employ, for it is really very
simple to understand and easy to recollect. It was im-
possible for me to get on without the help of something
of the sort, as I found our ordinary nomenclature far
too ambiguous as well as cumbrous for employment in
this book.

For example, the terms "uncle," "nephew," "grand-
father," and " grandson," have each of them two distinct
meanings. An uncle may be the brother of the father,
or the brother of the mother ; the nephew may be the
son of a brother, or the son of a sister ; and so on.
There are four kinds of first cousins, namely, the sons of
the two descriptions of uncles and those of the two cor-
responding aunts. There are sixteen kinds of first cousins
" once removed," for either A. may be the son of any one
of the four descriptions of male or of the four female
cousins of B., or B. may bear any one of those relation-
ships to A. I need not quote more instances in illustration
of what I have said, that unbounded confusion would have
been introduced had I confined myself in this book, to our
ordinary nomenclature.

The notation I employ gets rid of all this confused
and cumbrous language. It disentangles relationships
in a marvellously complete and satisfactory manner, and
enables us to methodise, compare, and analyse them in any
way we like.

Speaking generally, and without regarding the type in

NOTATION 45

which the letters are printed, F. stands for Father ; G. for
Grandfather; U. for Uncle; N. for Nephew; B. for
Brother ; S. for Son ; and P. for Grandson {Pdit-fils in
French).

These letters are printed in capitals when the relation-
ship to be expressed has passed through the male line,
and in small type when through the female line. There-
fore U. is the paternal uncle ; G. the paternal grandfather ;
N. is a nephew that is son of a brother ; P. a grandson
that is the child of a son. So again, u. is the maternal
uncle ; g. the maternal grandfather ; n. a nephew that is
son of a sister; p. a grandson that is the child of a
daughter.

Precisely the same letters, in the form of Italics, are
employed for the female relations. For example in cor-
respondence with TJ. there is U. to express an aunt that
is the sister of a father ; and to u. there is u. to express an
aunt that is the sister of a mother.

It is a consequence of this system of notation, that F.
and B. and S. are always printed in capitals, and that
their correlatives for mother, sister, and daughter are
always expressed in small italicised type, as/., &., and s.

The reader must mentally put the word his before the
letter denoting kinship, and ivas after it. Thus : —

Adams, John ; second President of the United States.
S. John Quincey Adams, sixth President.
P. C P. Adams, American Minister in England ; author.

would be read —

His [i.e. John Adams') son vjas John Quincey Adams.
IJis „ „ grandson was C. P. Adams.

40

NOTATION

The following table comprises the whole of this no-
tation : —

G. G.

Grandfather. = Grandmother.

I

u

Uncle.

I

u.

Aunt.

Father. = Mother.

Grandfather. = Grandmother,

\

I \ 1

11. U.

Uncle. Aunt.

B.

Brother.

The Person
described.

I.

Sister.

N.

Nephew.

N.

Niece.

s.

Son.

Daughter.

n.

Nephew.

~1
11.
Niece.

V. r.

Gr. -son. Gr. -daughter.

p. p.

Gr. -son. Gr. -daughter.

The last explanation I have to make, is the meaning
of brackets [ ] when they enclose a letter. It implies
that the person to whose name the letter in brackets is
annexed has not achieved sufficient public reputation to
be ranked, in statistical deductions, on equal terms with
the rest.

For facility of reference I give lists, in alphabetical
order, of all the letters, within the limits of two letters,
that I employ. Thus I always use GF. for great-grand-
father, and not FG., which means the same thing.

F.
B.

s.

Father.

Brother.

Son.

F.
h.
s.

Mother.

Sister.

Dangliter.

GEAjSJDFATHEES.

GRANDMOTHERS.

G.

Father's father.
Mother's father.

a.

9-

Father's mother.
Mother's mother.

GRANDSONS.

GRANDDAUGHTERS.

P.

Son's son.
Daughter's son.

F.

Son's daughter.
Daughter's daughter.

UNCLES

AUNTS.

U.
u.

Father's brother.
Mother's brother.

V.

Father's sister.
Mother's sister.

NEPHEWS.

NIECES.

N
n.

Brother's son
Sister's son..

n.

Brother's daughter.
Sister's daughter.

NOTATION

47

GREAT-UNCLES.
GB. Father's father's T^rother,
gB. Mother's father's brother.
GB. Father's mother's brother.
pB. Mother's mother's brother.

GBBAT-GRANBFATHEES.
-GF. Father's father's father.
gF. Mother's father's father.
GF, Father's mother's father,
g¥^ Mother's mother's father.

GREAT-NEPHE"WS,
NS. Brother's son's son.
nS. Sister's son's son.
NS, Brother's daughter's son.
nS. Sister's daughter's son.

GREAT-GRANDSONS.
PS Son's son's son.
pS, Daughter's son's son.
PS. Son's daughter's son.
jiS. Daughter's daughter's son.

FIRST COUSINS, MALE.
US. Father's brother's son.
uS. Mother's brother's sou.
US. Father's sister's son.
«S. Mother's sister's son.

GREAT-GREAT-GRANDFATHERS.
(G, g, G or g) followed by (G or g).

FIRST COUSINS, MALE, ONCE
REMOVED.

ASCENDIHO.

(G, g, Gf or g) followed by (N or n).

Descending.
(U, n, IT" or v) followed by (P or p).

GREAT-GREAT-UNCLES.

(G, g, G or g) followed by (U or u).

GREAT-GREAT-GRANDSONS.
(P or p) followed by (P or p).

GREAT-AUNTS.

G&, Father's father's sister.
g6. Mother's father's sister.
Gb. Father's mother's sister.
gb. Mother's mother's sister.

GREAT-GRANDMOTHERS.

Gf. Father's father's mother.
gf. Mother's father's mother.
Gf. Fatlier's mother's mother.
gf. Mother's mother's mother.

GREAT-NIECES.

Ns. Brother's son's daughter.
n«. Sister's son's daughter.
Ns. Brother's daughter's daughter.
ns. Sister's daughter's daughter.

GREAT-GRAND-DAUGHTERS.
Ps. Son's son's daughter,
ps. Daughter's son's daughter.
Fs. Ron's daughter's daughter.
ps. Daughter's daughter's daughter,

FIRST COUSINS, FEMALE.
U*. Father's brother's daughter.
US. Mother's brotlier's daughter.
Us. Father's sister's daughter.
us. Mother's sister's daughter.

GREAT-GREAT-GRANDMOTHERS.
(G, g, G or g) followed by (G or g).

FIRST COUSINS, FEMALE, ONCE
REMOVED.
Ascending.
(G, g, G or g) followed by (N or n).

Descending.
(U, u., U or 1/) followed by (P or p).

GREAT-GREAT-AUNTS.
(G, g, G or g) followed by (U or u).

GREAT-GREAT-GRANDDAUGHTERS
(P oTp) followed by (P or p).

THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 49

THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND BETWEEN
1660 AND 1865

The Judges of England, since the restoration of the
monarchy in 1660, form a group peculiarly well adapted
to afford a general outline of the extent and limitations of
heredity in respect to genius. A judgeship is a guarantee
of its possessor being gifted with exceptional ability ; the
Judges are sufficiently numerous and prolific to form an
adequate basis for statistical inductions, and they are the
subjects of several excellent biographical treatises. It is
therefore well to begin our inquiries with a discussion of
their relationships. We shall quickly arrive at definite
results, which subsequent chapters, treating of more illus-
trious men, and in other careers, will check and amplify.

It is necessary that I should first say something in
support of my assertion, that the office of a judge is really
a sufficient guarantee that its possessor is exceptionally
gifted. In other countries it may be different to what it
is with us, but we all know that in England, the Bench is
never spoken of without reverence for the intellectual
power of its occupiers. A seat on the Bench is a great
prize, to be won by the best men. No doubt there are
hindrances, external to those of nature, against a man
getting on at the Bar and rising to a judgeship. The
attorneys may not give him briefs when he is a young
barrister ; and even if he becomes a successful barrister,
his political party may be out of office for a long period,
at a time when he was otherwise ripe for advancement.
I cannot, however, believe that either of these are serious

E

50 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

obstacles in the long run. Sterling ability is sure to make
itself felt, and to lead to practice ; while as to politics, the
changes of party are sufficiently frequent to give a fair
chance to almost every generation. For every man who
is a judge, there may possibly be two other lawyers of
the same standing, equally fitted for the post, but it is
hard to believe there can be a larger number.

If not always the foremost, the Judges are therefore
among the foremost, of a vast body of legal men. The
Census speaks of upwards of 3,000 barristers, advocates,
and special pleaders ; and it must be recollected that
these do not consist of 3,000 men taken at hap-hazard,
but a large part of them are already selected, and it is
from these, by a second process of selection, that the
judges are mainly derived. When I say that a large part
of the barristers are selected men, I speak of those among
them who are of humble parentage, but have brilliant
natural gifts — who attracted notice as boys, or, it may be,
even as children, and were therefore sent to a good school.
There they won exhibitions and fitted themselves for col-
lege, where they supported themselves by obtaining scholar-
ships. Then came fellowships, and so they ultimately
found their way to the Bar. Many of these have risen to
the Bench. The parentage of the Lord Chancellors jus-
tifies my statement. There have been thirty of them
within the period included in my inquiries. Of these.
Lord Hardwicke was the son of a small attorney at Dover,
in narrow circumstances ; Lord Eldon (whose brother was
the great Admiralty Judge, Lord Stowell) was son of a
" coal fitter ; " Lord Truro was son of a sheriff's officer ;
and Lord St. Leonards (like Lord Tenterden, the Chief
Justice of Common Pleas) was son of a barber. Others
were sons of clergymen of scanty means. Others have
begun life in alien professions, yet, notwithstanding their
false start, have easily recovered lost ground in after life.
Lord Erskine was first in the navy and then in the army,
before he became a barrister. Lord Chelmsford was
originally a midshipman. Now a large number of men
with antecedents as unfavourable to success as these, and
yet successful men, are always to be found at the Bar, and

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 51

therefore I say the barristers are themselves a selected
body ; and the fact of every judge having been taken
from the foremost rank of 3,000 of them, is proof that his
exceptional ability is of an enormously higher order than
if the 3,000 barristers had been conscripts, drawn by lot
from the general mass of their countrymen. I therefore
need not trouble myself with quoting passages from
biographies, to prove that each of the Judges whose name
I have occasion to mention, is a highly gifted man. It
is precisely in order to avoid the necessity of this tedious
work, that I have selected the Judges for my first chapter.
In speaking of the English Judges, I have adopted the
well-known Zives of the Judges, by Foss, as my guide.
It was published in 1865, so I have adopted that date as
the limit of my inquiries. I have considered those only as
falling under the definition of "judges " whom he includes
as such. They are the Judges of the Courts of Chancery
and Common Law, and the Master of the Rolls, but not
the Judges of the Admiralty nor of the Court of Canter-
bury. By the latter limitation, I lose the advantage of
counting Lord Stowell (brother of the Lord Chancellor
Eldon), the remarkable family of the Lushingtons, that of
Sir R. Phillimore, and some others. Through the limitation
as regards time, I lose, by ending with the year 1865, the
recently-created judges, such as Judge Selwyn, brother
of the Bishop of Lichfield, and also of the Professor
of Divinity at Cambridge. But I believe, from cursory
inquiries, that the relations of these latter judges, speaking
generally, have not so large a share of eminence as we
shall find among those of the judges in my list. This
might have been expected, for it is notorious that the
standard of ability in a modern judge is not so high as
it used to be. The number of exceptionally gifted men
being the same, it is impossible to supply the new demand
for heads of great schools and for numerous other careers,
now thrown open to able youths, without seriously limiting
the field whence alone good judges may be selected. By
beginning at the Restoration, which I took for my com-
mencement, because there was frequent jobbery in earher
days, I lose a Lord Keeper (of the same rank as a Lord

E 2

52

THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Chancellor), and his still greater son, also a Lord Chan-
cellor, namely, the two Bacons. I state these facts to
show that I have not picked out the period in question,
because it seemed most favourable to my argument, but
simply because it appeared the most suitable to bring out
the truth as to hereditary genius, and was, at the same
time, most convenient for me to discuss.

There are 286 judges within the limits of my inquiry;
109 of them have one or more eminent relations, and three
others have relations whom I have noticed, but they are
marked off with brackets, and are therefore not to be
included in the following statistical deductions. As the
readiest method of showing, at a glance, the way in which
these relations are distributed, I give a table below in
which they are all compactly registered. This table is
a condensed summary of the Appendix to the present
chapter, which should be consulted by the reader when-
ever he desires fuller information.

TABLE I.

SUMMARY OF RELATIONSHIPS OF 109 JUDGES, GROUPED
INTO 85 FAMILIES.

One relation {or
Atuey ... U.

Alibone . . G.

Bedingfield .... U.

Best (Lord Wynford) . . g.
Bickersteth (Lord Langdale) u.
Bramston . . . . F.

Browne . . . uS.

Brougham, Lord . gB.

Campbell, Lord .... N.
Cooper (Earl Shaftesbury). P.
Copley (Lord Lyiidhurst) . F.

De Grey (Lord Walsingham) S.

Erie

Eyre, Sir R. and father
Forster . . . . ,

Gurney .
Harcourt, Lord . .

Heath S.

Henley (E. of Northington) F.
Hotham ... . . . B.

B.
F.
F.
S.
G.

two in family).

Keating F.

King, Lord ... u.

Lawrence . . E.

Lee B.

Mansfield, Lord . P.

Milton ... B.

Patteson S.

2. Powis, Sir L. and brother. B.

2. Raymond, Lord, and father F.
2. Reynolds, Sir J. and nephew N.

Romilly, Lord ^ S

Scott (Earl Eldon) B.

Sewell p.

Thesiger (Lord Chelmsford) S.'

Thurlow, Lord . ' B.

Treby s.

(Twisden, see Finch.)

Verney . . . g.

Wigram B.

Wood (Lord Hatherley) . F.

' The kinship is reckoned from Sir Samuel Romilly.

BETM''EE]Sr 1660 AND 1865

53

Two and three relations [or three and four in family).

Alderson . . . . F. Us.

(Bathiirst, Earl, see Bullev.)

JBlackburn .... B. {?.

Blackstoiie S. N.

2. BuUerandBathurstjEaiiU. u N.

Burnet G. F.

Churchill 1 . . . UP. n.

Clarke B. u.

2. Clive, Sir E. and uncle U. UP.
2. Cowper, Earl, & brother B. NS.

Dampier F. B.

Dolben S. B. gB.

2. Erskine, Lord, and son B. S.
2. Gould, Sir H. and

grandson ... P. p.

Hewitt (Lord Lifford). 2 S.
2. Jeffreys, Lord, and

Trevor G. ?7S.

Jervis F. GN.

Lechmero P. u.

Lovell . . . . pS. pi".

Wares S. B.

Parker (E. of Maccles-
field) and Sir Thomas S. UP.

Pepys(E.ofCottenham) G. g. B.

Pollock 2 B. S.

Rolfe (Lord Cranworth) ffN". gF.

Scarlett (Lord Abinger) 2 S.

Spelman F. GF.

Sutton (Lord Manners) B. N.

Talbot, Lord . . . . F. N".

Turner 2 U. '

2. Wilde, Lord Truro, and

nephew B. N.

2. Willes, Sir J. and son. B. S.

Willmot P. PS.

2. Windham, Sir W. and

brother .... B.P.ffN.

F. 2S. t^S. GN. PS. (?gN).
2 S. 2 US.
2 U. 3 US. S.
F. 2S. 2B.

B. F. u. g. pS.

Four or more relations {or five and more in family).
4. Atkyns, Sir E. and three others ... . G. F. B. p.

Coleridge '^ S. s. 3 N. P. NS.

Denison ... . . . . . 4 NS.

Denman F. S. uS. uP.

3. Viz. Finch (Earl of Nottingham), Twisden,
andLegge

2. Herbert, Lord Keeper, and son . . .

3. Hyde, Earl Clarendon, and cousin . .

Law (Lord Ellenborough)

(Leggo, see Finch. )

Lyttleton '

3. Viz. 2 Montagu'' and 1 Noith (Ld. Guilford) G. B. 2S. 2N. 2P. NS. 5iV

(North, see Montagu.)
2. Pratt, Earl Camden, and Sir J F. S. n. nS.

Somers, Earl (6trf see Yorke) . ... 2iVS. 2JVP.

Trevor, Lord g. F. S. U. GB.

(Trevor, Master of the Rolls, see Jeffreys.)

Vaughan 3 B. 2 N. p.

2. Yorke, Earl Hardwioke, and son ; also, in

part. Earl Somers 2 S. 2 P. PS.

1 The kinship is reckoned from the Great Duke of Marlborough.

"■ Ditto, from Coleridge the Poet

^ Ditto, from the Lord Keeper.

* Ditto, from Chief Justice the first Earl of Manchester ; the two nephews
are William, Ch. B. E., and the Earl of Sandwich ; the two grandsons,
the Earl of Halifax and James, Ch.B.E. The genealogical table in the
Appendix to this chapter, will explain these and the other kinships of the
Montagu family.

54 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Several remarkable features in the contents of this table
will catch the eye at once. I will begin by shortly alluding
to them, and will enter more into details a little further
on. First, it will be observed, that the Judges are so
largely interrelated, that 109 of them are grouped into
only 85 families. There are seventeen doublets, among
the Judges, two triplets, and one quadruplet. In addition
to these, might be counted six other sets, consisting of
Ihose whose ancestors sat on the Bench previously to the
accession of Charles II., namely, Bedingfield, Forster,
Hyde, Finch, Windham, and Lyttleton. Another fact
to be observed, is the nearness of the relationships in iny
list. The single letters are far the most common. Also,
though a man has twice as many grandfathers as fathers,
and probably more than twice as many grandsons as sons,
yet the Judges are found more frequently to have eminent
fathers than grandfathers, and eminent sons than grandsons.
In the third degree of relationship, the eminent kinsmen
are yet more rare, although the number of individuals in
those degrees is increased in a duplicate proportion. When
a judge has no more than one eminent relation, that relation
is nearly always to be found in the first or second degree.
Thus in the first section of the table, which is devoted to
single relationships, though it includes as many as thirty-
nine entries, there are only two among them (viz. Browne
and Lord Brougham) whose kinships extend beyond the
second degi'ee. It is in the last section of the table, which
treats of whole families, largely gifted with ability, that the
distant kinships are chiefly to be found. I annex a table
(Table II.) extracted from the preceding one, which
exhibits these facts with great clearness. Column A con-
tains the facts just as they were observed, and column D
shows the percentage of individuals, in each degree of
kinship to every 100 judges, who have become eminent.

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865

55

TABLE II.

Degrees of Kinship.

A.

B.

C.

D.

Name of the degree.

CoiTCsponding letter.

i r Father. . .

0,°-^ Brother .

■= Uou

22 P.
.30 B.
31 S.

...

22
30
31

26
35
36

100
150
100

26-0
23-3
36-0

9-1
8-2
12-6

o /Grandfather
£ 1 Uncle .
^) Neiihew .
^, I, Grandson

9U.
UN.
UP.

Se-
2n.
5 p.

13
15
16
IS

15
18
19
19

200
400
400
200

Y-5
4-5
4-75
9-5

2-6
1-6
1-7
3-7

w /Great-grandfather
« Great-uncle
^ • First-cousin .
"S Great-nephew . .
" V Great-grandson .

1 6P.
1GB,

6 IIS.
7NS.

2 PS.

IgF.
2gB.
2uS.
InS.
2ijS.

OF.

GB.

1 PS.
T NS.
IPS.

17F.
OffB.
lufi.
OnS.
OjiS.

2
3
9
1.5
6

2

4

11

17

6

400
800
800
800
400

0-5
0-6
1-4
2-1
1-6

0-2
0-2
0-6
0-7
0-6

All more remote .

12

14

0-0

0-0

A. Number of eminent men in each degree of kinship to the most eminent man of the
family (85 families).

B. The preceding column raised in proportion to 100 families.

C. Number of individuals in each degi-ee of kinship to 100 men.

D. Percentage of eminent men in each degree of kinship to the most eminent member
of distinguished families ; it was obtained by dividing B by C and multiplying by 100.

E. Percentages of the previous column reduced in the proportion of (286 - 24,1 or) 242
to 85, in order to apply to families generally.

Table II. also gives materials for judging of the com-
parative influence of the male and female lines, in con-
veying ability. Thanks to my method of notation, it is
perfectly easy to separate the two lines in the way I am
about to explain. I do not attempt to compare relations
in the first degiree of kinship — namely, fathers with
mothers, sons with daughters, or brothers with sisters,
because there exists no criterion for a just comparison of
the natural ability of the different sexes. Nay, even if
there were means for testing it, the result would be falla-
cious. A mother transmits masculine peculiarities to her
male child, which she does not and cannot possess ; and,
similarly, a woman who is endowed with fewer gifts of a
masculine type than her husband, may yet contribute in
a larger degree to the masculine intellectual superiority
of her son. I therefore shift my inquiry from the first, to

1 That is to say, 236 Judges, less 24, who are included as subordinate members of the
85 families.

66 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

the second and third degrees of kinship. As regards the
second degree, I compare the paternal grandfather with
the maternal, the uncle by the father's side with the uncle
by the mother's, the nephew by the brother's side with the
nephew by the sister's, and the grandson by the son with
the grandson by the daughter. On the same principle
I compare the kinships in the third degree : that is to
say, the father of the father's father with the father of the
mother's mother, and so on. The whole of the work is
distinctly exposed to view in the following compact
table : —
In the Second Degbeb.

7G. + 9U. + 14N. + 11 P. = 41 kinships through males.

6g. + 6u. + 2 n. + 5p. =19 ,, ,, females.

In the Third Degree.

IGF. + 1GB. + 5 US. + 7NS. + 2PS. = 19 kinships through males.
O^F. + OgB. + luS. + OnS. +OpS. = 1 „ ,, females.

Total, 60 through males, 20 through females.

The numbers are too small to warrant any very decided
conclusion ; but they go far to prove that the female in-
fluence is inferior to that of the male in conveying ability.
It must, however, be observed, that the difference between
the totals in the second degree is chiefly due to the
nephews — a relationship difficult to trace on the female
side, because, as a matter of fact, biographers do not speak
so fully of the descendants of the sisters of their hero as
of those of his brothers. As regards the third degree, the
relationships on the female side are much more difficult to
ferret out than those on the male, and I have no doubt
I have omitted many of them. In my earlier attempts,
the balance stood still more heavily against the female
side, and it has been reduced exactly in proportion to the
number of times I have revised my data. Consequently,
though I first suspected a large residuum against the
female line, I think there is reason to believe the influ-
ence of females but little inferior to that of males, in
transmitting judicial ability.

It is, of course, a grief to me, in writing this book, that
circumstances make it impossible to estimate the influence
of the individual peculiarities of the mother — for good or

BETWEEW 1660 AND 1865 57

for bad — upon her offspring. They appear to me, for the
reasons stated, to be as important elements in the inquiry
as those of the father, and yet I am obliged to completely
ignore them in a large majority of instances, on account of
the lack of reliable information. Nevertheless, I have
numerous arguments left to ■ prove that genius is here-
ditary.

Before going further, J must entreat my readers to
abandon an objection which very likely may present itself
to their minds, and which I can easily show to be untenable.
People who do not realize the nature of my arguments
have constantly spoken to me to this effect : " It is of no use
your quoting successes unless you take failures into equal
account. Eminent men may have eminent relations, but
they also have very many who are ordinary, or even stupid,
and there are not a few who are either eccentric or down-
right mad." I perfectly allow all this, but it does not in
the least affect the cogency of my arguments. If a man
breeds from strong, well-shaped dogs, but of mixed pedigree,
the puppies will be sometimes, but rarely, the equals of
their parents. They will commonly be of a mongrel,
nondescript type, because ancestral peculiarities arc apt to
crop out in the offspring. Yet notwithstanding all this, it
is easy to develop the desirable characteristics of individual
dogs into the assured heirloom of a new breed. The
breeder selects the puppies that most nearly approach the
wished-for type, generation after generation, until they
have no ancestor, within many degrees, that has objection-
able peculiarities. So it is with men and women. Because
one or both of a child's parents are able, it does not in the
least follow as a matter of necessity, but only as one of
moderately unfavourable odds, that the child will be able
also. He inherits an extraordinary mixture of qualities
displayed in his grandparents, great-grandparents, and
more remote ancestors, as well as from those of his father
and mother. The most illustrious and so-called "well-
bred " families of the human race, are utter mongrels as
regards their natural gifts of intellect and disposition.

What I profess to prove is this : that if two children are
taken, of whom one has a parent exceptionally gifted in

58 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

a high degree — say as one in 4,000, or as one in a million —
and the other lias not, the former child has an enormously
greater chance of turning out to be gifted in a high degree,
than the other. Also, I argue that, as a new race can be
obtained in animals and plants, and can be raised to so
great a degree of purity that it will maintain itself, with
moderate care in preventing the more faulty members of
the flock from breeding, so a race of gifted men might be
obtained, under exactly similar conditions.

I must apologize for anticipating, in this off-hand and
very imperfect manner, the subject of a future chapter by
these few remarks; but I am really obliged to do so,
knowing from experience how j)ertinaciously strangers
to the reasoning by which the laws of ■ heredity are
established, are inclined to prejudge my conclusions, by
blindly insisting that the objection to which 1 have
referred has overbearing weight.

I will now proceed with an examination of what may
be learnt from the relationships of the Judges. First, I
would ask, are the abler judges more rich in eminent
relations than those who are less able ? There are two
ways of answering this question : the one is to examine
into the relationships of the law lords as compared with
that of the puisne judges, or of the chancellors compared
with that of the judges generally ; and the other is to
determine whether or no the persons whose names are
entered in the third column of Table I. are above the
average of judges in respect to ability. Here are a few of
the Lord Chancellors. There are only 30 of those
high legal officers within the limits of my inquiry, yet 24
of these have eminent relations ; whereas out of the (286
— 30 or) 256 other judges, only (114 — 24 or) 90 have
eminent relations. There are therefore 80 per cent, of
the chancellors, as compared to 36 per cent, of the rest of
the judges, that have eminent relations. The proportion
would have been greater if I had compared the chancellors,
or the chancellors and the other law lords, with the puisne
judges.

The other test I proposed, is equally satisfactory.
There can be no doubt of the exceptionally eminent

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 59

ability of the men whose names appear in the third
column. To those who object to my conclusion because
Lord Chancellors have more opportunities of thrusting
relatives, by jobbery, into eminence than are possessed by
the other judges, I can do no more than refer them to
what I have already said about reputation being a test of
ability, and by giving a short list of the more remarkable
cases of relations to the Lord Chancellors, which I think
will adequately meet their objection. They are — ■

1. Earl Bathurst and his daughter's son, the famous
judge. Sir F. Buller. 2. Earl Camden and his father.
Chief Justice Pratt. 3. Earl Clarendon and the remark-
able family of Hyde, in which were two uncles and one
cousin, all English judges, besides one Welsh judge, and
many other men of distinction. 4. Earl Cowper, his
brother the judge, and his great-nephew the poet. 5.
Earl Eldon and his brother Lord Stowell. G. Lord
Erskine, his eminent legal brother the Lord Advocate of
Scotland, and his son the judge. 7. Earl Nottingham and
the most remarkable family of Finch. 8, 9, 10. Earl
Hardwicke and his son, also a Lord Chancellor, who died
suddenly, and that son's great-uncle. Lord Somers, also a
Lord Chancellor. 11. Lord Herbert, his son a judge, his
cousins Lord Herbert of Cherbury and George the poet
and divine. 12. Lord King and his uncle John Locke the
philosopher. 13. The infamous but most able Lord
Jeffreys had a cousin just like him, namely. Sir J. Trevor,
Master of the Rolls. 14. Lord Guilford is member of a
family to which I simply despair of doing justice, for it
is linked with connexions of such marvellous ability,
judicial and statesmanlike, as to deserve a small volume to
describe it. It contains thirty first-class men in near
kinship, including Montagus, Sydneys, Herberts, Dudleys,
and others. 15. Lord Truro had two able legal brothers,
one of whom was Chief Justice at the Cape of Good
Hope; and his nephew is an English judge, recently
created Lord Penzance. I will here mention Lord
Lyttleton, Lord Keeper of Charles I., although many
members of his most remarkable family do not fall within
my limits. His father, the Chief Justice of North Wales,

60 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

married a lady, the daughter of Sir J. Walter, the Chief
Justice of South Wales, and also sister of an English
judge. She bore him Lord Keeper Lyttleton, also Sir
Timothy, a judge. Lord Lyttleton's daughter's son (she
married a cousin) was Sir T. Lyttleton, the Speaker of
the House of Commons.

There is, therefore, abundant reason to conclude that
the kinsmen of Lord Chancellors are far richer in natural
gifts than those of the other judges.

I wiil now take another test of the existence of heredi-
tary ability. It is a comparison of the number of entries
in the columns of Table I. Supposing that natural gifts
were due to mere accident, unconnected with parentage,
then the entries would be distributed in accordance with
the law that governs the distribution of accidents. If it
be a hundred to one against some member of any family,
within given limits of kinship, drawing a lottery prize, it
would be a million to one against three members of the
same family doing so (nearly, but not exactly, because the
size of the family is limited), and a million millions to one
against six members doing so. Therefore, if natural gifts
were due to mere accident, the first column of Table I.
would have been enormously longer than the second column,
and the second column enormously longer than the third ;
but they are not so. There are nearly as many cases of
two or three eminent relations as of one eminent relation ;
and as a set-off against the thirty-nino cases that appear
in the first column, there arc no less than fifteen cases in
the third.

It is therefore clear that ability is not distributed at
hap-hazard, but that it clings to certain families.

We will proceed to a third test.

If genius be hereditary, as I assert it to be, the character-
istics that mark a judge ought to be frequently transmitted
to his descendants. The majority of judges belong to a
strongly-marked type. They are not men who are carried
away by sentiment, who love seclusion and dreams, but
they are prominent members of a very different class, one
that Englishmen are especially prone to honour for at
least the six lawful days of the week. I mean that they

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 63

are vigorous, shrewd, practical, helpful men ; glorying in
the rough-and-tumble of public life, tough in constitution
and strong in digestion, valuing what money brings,
aiming at position and influence, and desiring to found
families. The vigour of a judge is testified by the fact
that the average age of their appointment in the last
three reigns has been fifty-seven. The labour and respon-
sibility of the office seem enormous to lookers-on, yet
these elderly men continue working with ease for many
more years ; their average age of death is seventy-five,
and they commonly die in harness. Now are these
remarkable gifts and peculiarities inherited by their sons ?
Do the judges often have sons who succeed in the same
career, where success would have been impossible if they
had not been gifted with the special qualities of their
fathers ? The best answer is a list of names. They will
be of much interest to legal readers ; others can glance
them over, and go on to the results.

JUDGES OF ENGLAND, AND OTHER HIGH LEGAL OFFICERS,
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865, WHO WERE, OR ARE, RELATED.

I mark those cases with an asterisk (*) where both relations are English

Judges.

FATHERS. SONS.

^^A^^„„„ =■■ T?,!,.. ^ n w /rt\,„« TT \ f Sir Robert, Chief Just. C.P.

•Atkyns, Sir Edward, B.B. (Chas. II.) \ gjj. Edward, B.E. (Jas. II.)

Atkyns, Sir Richard, Chief Just. N. Wales. Sir Edward, B.E. (Clias. H.)

»Bramston, Sir Francis, Cliief K.B.(Chas.I.)' Sir Francis, B.E. (Chas. II.)

Coleridge, Sir Jolm, Just. Q.B. (Vict.) Sir John Duke, Solic.-Gen.

Dolhen, Sir Wni., Just. K.B. (Will. III.) Sir Gilbert, Just. C.P. Ireland ; cr. Bart.

*Erskine, T. ; cr. Lord Erskine ; Lord. Chan. Hon. Sir Thomas, Just. C P. (Vict.)

•Byre, Sir Samuel, Just. K.B. (Will. III.) Sir Robert, Chief Just. C.P. (Geo. II.)

rinch,Heneage,L.Ch.;cr. E.otNottingliam. Heneage, Solic.-6en, ; or. Earl Aylesford.

Finch, Sir Heneage, Recorder of London. Heneage, Ld. Chan. ; cr. E.of Nottinglxam.

•Forster, Sir James, Just. C.P. (Cha,s. I.) Sir Robert, Chief Just. K.B. (C.ias. II.)

Gurney, Sir John, B.E. (Vict.) Rt.Hon. Russell Gurney,RecorderofLond.

'Herbert, Sir Edw., Lord Keeper. (Chas. II.) Sir Edward, Chief Just. K.B. (Jas. II.)

Hewitt, James ; cr. Ld. Lifford ; Just. K.B. Joseph, Just. K.B. Ireland.

Jervis, , Chief Just, of Chester. Sir John, Chief Just. C.P. (Vict.)

Law, Edw. ;or. Ld.Ellenborough ; Ch. K.B. Chas. Ewan, M. P., Recorder of London.

'Pratt, Sir Jolm, Chief Just. K.B. (Geo. II.) Earl Camden, Lord Chanc. (Geo. III.)

•Raymond, SirThomas, Just. C.B. Robert; cr.Ld. Raymond ;Ch.K.B. (Geo II.)

Romilly, Sir Samuel, Solic-Gen. Cr. Lord Bomilly, Master of Rolls. (Vict.)

•Willes, Sir John, Chief Just. C.P. (Geo. III.) Sir Edward, Just. K.B. (Geo. III.)

•Yorke, Philip, Ld. Chanc; cr.E. Hardwicke. Hon. Charles, Lord Chanc. (Geo. III.)

1 I count the fathers of the judges of Charles II. because the judges of
the present reign are too young to have judges for sons.

62 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

BEOTHBES.

'Atkyns, Sir Eobert, Chief C.P. (Will. III.) Sir Edward, B.B. (Jas. II.)
'Cowper, Wm. ; cr. Earl Cowper ; Ld.Chanc. Sir Spencer, Just. C.P. (Geo. II.)

Erskine, T. ; cr. Lord Erskine ; Lord Chanc. Henry, twice Lord Advocate, Scotland.

■CTj tjT5i...i.^i,-»iTT> /r,i. TT \ f Sir Frcderick, 8 Judgc ju S. Walcs.

Hyde, Sir EoDert, Chief Z.B. (Chas. II.) { j^^^^g^ of Admii-alty.

Lee, Sir ■William, Chief K.B. (Geo. II.) George, Dean of Arches, Ac.

«Lyttleton, Lord, Lord Keeper. (Chas. I.) Sir Timothy, B.E. (Chas. IL)

North, E. ; cr. Earl of Guilford ; Ld. Chanc. Eoger, Attorney-Gen. to Queen.

Pollock, Sir F. Chief B.E. (Vict.) Sir David, Chief Just. Bombay.

•Powis, Six Lyttleton, Just. K.B.(Gco. I.) Sir Thomas, Just. K.B. (Geo L)

Scarlett, Sir J. ; cr. Ld. Abinger ; Ch. B.B. Sir Wm. Ch. Just. Jamaica.

Scott, John ; cr.Earl of Eldon ; Lord Chanc. William ; cr. LordStowell ; Judge Adm.

Wilde, T. ; cr. Lord Truro ; Lord Chanc. Sir , Ch. Just. Cape of Good Hope.

'Wynham, Sir Hugh, B.E. (Chas. IL) Sir Wadham, B.E. (Chas. II.)

GEANDPATHEES. GEANDSONS.

•Atkyns, Sir Eobt. Chief C.P. (Will. IIL) Sir J. Tracy (assumed name of Atkyns),

Cursitor B.B. (Geo. III.)

Biu'net, , Scotch Judge ; Lord Cramond. Sir Thomas Burnet, Just. C.P.

*Gould, Sir Henry, Just. Q.B. (Anne.) Sir Henry Gould, Just. C.P. (Geo. IIL)

Jeffreys, , Judge in N. Wales. Jeffreys, Lord, Lord Chanc. (Jas. II.)

Pinch, H. Solic-Gen. ; cr. E. Aylesford. Hon. H. Legge, B.E. (Geo. II.)

Walter, Sir E. Chief Just. S. Wales. Lyttleton, Sir T. B.B, (Chas. II.)

"Heath, Sfr E. Chief K.B. (Chas. L) Verney, Hon. Sir J. Master of EoUs.

Out of the 286 Judges, more than OTie in every nine of
them have been either father, son, or brother to another
judge, and the other high legal relationships have been
even more numerous. There cannot, then, remain a doubt
but that the peculiar type of ability that is necessary to
a judge is often transmitted by descent.

The reader must guard himself against the supposition,
that because the Judges have so many legal relations,
therefore they have few other relations of eminence in
other walks of life. A long list might be made out of
those who had bishops and archbishops for kinsmen. No
less than ten judges — of whom one. Sir Robert Hyde,
appeared in the previous list — have a bishop or an arch-
bishop for a brother. Of these. Sir William Dolben was
brother to one Archbishop of York and son of the sister
of another, namely of John Williams, who was also the
Lord Keeper to James I. There are cases of Poet-relations,
as Cowper, Coleridge, Milton, Sir Thomas Overbury, and
Waller. There are numerous relatives who are novelists,
physicians, admirals, and generals. My lists of kinsmen
at the end of this chapter are very briefly treated, but
they include the names of many great men, whose deeds
have filled large volumes. It is one of my most serious

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 63

drawbacks in writing this book, to feel that names, which
never now present themselves to my eye without asso-
ciations of respect and reverence, for the great qualities
of those who bore them, are likely to be insignificant and
meaningless to the eyes of most of my readers — indeed
to all of those who have never had occasion to busy them-
selves with their history. I know how great was my own
ignorance of the character of the great men of previous
generations, before I occupied myself with biographies, and
I therefore reasonably suspect that many of my readers
will be no better informed about them than I was myself
A collection of men that I have learned to look upon as
an august Valhalla, is likely to be regarded, by those who
are strangers to the facts of biographical history, as an
assemblage of mere respectabilities.

The names of North and Montagu, among the Judges,
introduce us to a remarkable breed of eminent men, set
forth at length in the genealogical tree of the Montagus,
and again in that of the Sydneys (see the chapter on
" Literary Men "), to whose natural history — if the ex-
pression be permitted — a few pages may be profitably
assigned. There is hardly a name in those pedigrees
which is not more than ordinarily eminent : many are
illustrious. They are closely tied together in their kin-
ship, and they extend through ten generations. The
main roots of this diffused ability lie in the families of
Sydney and Montagu, and, in a lesser degree, in that
of North.

The Sydney blood — I mean that of the descendants
of Sir William Sydney and his wife — had extraordinary
influence in two different combinations. First with the
Dudleys, producing in the first generation. Sir Philip
Sydney and his eminent brother and sister ; in the second
generation, at least one eminent man ; and in the third
generation, Algernon Sydney, with his able brother and
much be-praised sister. The second combination of the
Sydney blood was with the Harringtons, producing in the
first generation a literary peer, and Elizabeth the mother
of the large and most remarkable family that forms the
chief feature in my genealogical table.

64 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

The Montagu blood, as represented by Sir Edward, who
died in the Tower, 1644, is derived from three distinct
sources. His great-grandfather (^F.) was Sir John Fin-
nieux, Chief Justice of the King's Bench ; his grandfather
(g.) was John Roper, Attorney-General to Henry VHI. ;
and his father — by far the most eminent of the three —
was Sir Edward Montagu, Chief Justice of the King's
Bench. Sir Edward Montagu, son of the Chief Justice,
married Elizabeth Harrington, of whom I have just
spoken, and had a large family, who in themselves and
in their descendants became most remarkable. To men-
tion only the titles they won : in the first generation they
obtained two peerages, the earldom of Manchester and
the barony of Montagu ; in the second they obtained two
more, the earldom of Sandwich and the barony of Capel ;
in the third five more, the dukedom of Montagu, earl-
doms of Halifax and of Essex, the barony of Guilford,
and a new barony of Capel (second creation) ; in the
fourth one more, the dukedom of Manchester (the Premier
in 1701) ; in the fifth one more, the earldom of Guilford.
The second Earl of Guilford, the Premier of George III.
(best known as Lord North), was in the sixth generation.

It is wholly impossible for me to describe the charac-
teristics of all the individuals who are jotted down in ,
my genealogical tree. I could not do it without giving a
vast deal more room than I can spare. But this much
I can do, and ought to do ; namely, to take those who
are most closely linked with the Judges, and to show that
they possessed sterling ability, and did not hold their
high positions by mere jobbery, nor obtain their reputa-
tions through the accident of birth or circumstances. I
will gladly undertake to show this, although it happens
in the present instance to put my cause in a peculiarly
disadvantageous light, because Francis North, the Lord
Keeper, the first Baron Guilford, is the man of all others,
in that high position (identical, or nearly so, with that
of a Lord Chancellor), whom modem authorities vie in
disparaging and condemning. Those who oppose my
theories might say, the case of North being Lord Keeper
shows it is impossible to trust official rank as a criterion

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 ' 65

of ability; he was' promoted by jobbery, and jobbed
when he was promoted •, he inherited family influence,
not natural intellectual gifts : and the same may be said
of all the members of this or of any other pedigree. As
I implied before, there is enough truth in this objection
to make it iinpossible to meet it by a flat contradiction,
based on a plain and simple statement. It is necessary
to analyse characters, and to go a little into detail. I
will do this, and when it is concluded I believe many of
my readers will better appreciate than they did before,
how largely natural intellectual gifts are the birthright of
some families.

Francis North, the Lord Keeper, was one of a family of
five brothers and one sister. The lives of three of the
brothers are familiarly known to us through the charming
biographies written by another brother, Roger North.
Their position in the Montagu family is easily discovered
by means of the genealogical tree. They fall in the third
of those generations I have just described — the one in
which the family gained one dukedom, two earldoms, and
two baronies. Their father was of a literary stock, con-
tinued backwards in one line during no less than five
generations. The first Lord North was an eminent lawyer
in the time of Queen Elizabeth, aiid his son — an able man
and an ambassador — ^married the daughter of Lord Chan-
cellor Rich. His son again — who did not live to enjoy the
peerage — married the daughter of a Master of the Court
of Requests, and his great-great-grandsons — the inter-
mediate links being more or less distinguished, but of
whose marriages I know little — were the brothers North,
of whom I am about to speak.

The father of these brothers was the fourth Baron North.
He was a literary man, and, among other matters, wrote
the life of the founder of his family. He was an " eco-
nomical " man, and " exquisitely virtuous and sober in
his person." The style of his writings was not so bright
as that of his father, the second baron, who was described
as full of spirit and flame, and who was an author both
in prose and verse ; his poems were praised by Walpole.
The mother of the brothers, namely, Anne Montagu, is

^6 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

described by her son as a compendium of charity and
wisdom. I suspect it was from the fourth Baron North
that the disagreeable qualities in three of the brothers
North were derived — such as the priggishness of the Lord
Keeper, and that curious saving, mercantile spirit that
appeared under different forms in the Lord Keeper, the
Financier, and the Master of Trinity College. I cannot
avoid alluding to these qualities, for they are prominent
features in their characters, and find a large place in their
biographies.

In speaking of the Lord Keeper, I think I had better
begin with the evil part of his character. When that has
been admitted and done with, the rest of my task will be
pleasant and interesting. In short, the Lord Keeper is
mercilessly handled in respect to his public character.
Lord Campbell calls him the most odious man that ever
held the Great Seal, and says that throughout his whole life
he sought and obtained advancement by the meanest arts.
Bishop Burnet calls him crafty and designing. Lord
Macaulay accuses him of selfishness, cowardice, and mean-
ness. I have heard of no writer who commends his public
character except his brother, who was tenderly attached to
him. I should say, that even Lord Campbell acknowledges
the Lord Keeper to have been extremely amiable in all his
domestic relations, and that nothing can be more touching
than the account we have of the warm and steady affec-
tion between him and his brother, who survived to be his
biographer. I am, however, no further concerned with
the Lord Keeper's public character than to show that,
notwithstanding his most unworthy acts to obtain advance-
ment, and notwithstanding he had relatives in high offices
to help him, his own ability and that of his brothers were
truly remarkable.

Bishop Burnet says of him that he had not the virtues
of his predecessor (Lord Nottingham), but he had parts
far beyond him. However, Lord Campbell dissents from
this, and remarks that " a Nottingham does not arise above
once in a century." (I will here beg the reader not to
be unmindful of the marvellous hereditary gifts of the
Nottingham or Finch family.) Macaulay says his in-

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 67

tellect was clear, his industry great, his proficiency in
letters and science respectable, and his legal learning more
than respectable. His brother Roger writes thus of the
Lord Keeper's youth : —

" It was singular and remarkable in him that, together
with the study of the law, which is thought ordinarily to
devour the whole studious time of a young gentleman, he
continued to pursue his inquiries into all ingenious arts,
history, humanity, and languages ; whereby he became not
only a good lawyer, but a good historian, politician, mathe-
matician, natural philosopher, and,! must add, musician
in perfection."

The Hon. Sir Dudley North, his younger brother, was
a man of exceedingly high abilities and vigour. He went
as a youth to Smyrna, where his good works are not
yet forgotten, and where he made a large fortune ; then,
returning to England, he became at once a man of the
highest note in Parliament as a financier. There was
an unpleasant side to his character when young, but he
overmastered and outgrew it. Namely, he first showed a
strange bent to traffic when at school ; afterwards he
cheated sadly, and got into debts ; then he cheated his
parents to pay the debts. At last he made a vigorous
effort, and wholly Reformed himself, so that his brother
concludes his biography in this way : —

" If I may be so free as to give my thoughts of his
morals, I must allow that, as to all the mercantile arts and
stratagems of trade wliich could be used to get money
from those he dealt with, I believe he was no niggard ; but
as for falsities ... he was as clear as any man living."

It seems, from the same authority, that he was a very
forward, lively, and beautiful child. At school he did not
get on so well with his books, as he had an excessive desire
for action ; still, his ability was such that a little applica-
tion went a long way with him, and in the end he came out
a moderate scholar. He was a great swimmer, and could
live in the water for a whole afternoon. (I mention this,
because I shall hereafter have occasion to speak of physical
gifts not unfrequently accompaiiying intellectual ones.) He
sometimes left his clothes in charge of a porter below

f2

68 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

London Bridge, then ran naked upon the mud-shore of the
Thames up ahnost as high as Clielsea, for the pleasure of
swimming down to his clothes with the tide, and he loved
to end by shooting the cascade beneath old London Bridge.
I often marvel at his feat, when I happen to be on the
river in a steamer.

I will now quote Macaulay's description of his first
appearance, in his after life, on the stage of English
politics. Speaking, in his " History of England," of the
period immediately following the accession of James II.,
Macaulay says —

" The person on whom devolved the task of devising
ways and means was Sir Dudley North, younger brother
of the Lord Keeper. Dudley North was one of the ablest
men of his time. He had early in life been sent to the
Levant, where he had long been engaged in mercantile
pursuits. Most men would, in such a situation, have
allowed tlieir .faculties to rust ; for at Smyrna and Con-
stantinople there were few books and few intelligent
companions. But the young factor had one of those
vigorous understandings which are independent of external
aids. In his solitude he meditated deeply on the philo-
sophy of trade, and thought out, by degrees, a complete
and admirable theory — substantially the same with that
which a hundred years later was expounded by Adam
Smith." North was brought into Parliament for Banbuiy ;
and, though a new member, was the person on whom the
Lord Treasurer chiefly relied for the conduct of financial
busiuess in the Lower House. " North's ready wit and
perfect knowledge of trade prevailed, both in the Treasury
and the Parliament, against all opposition. The old
members were amazed at seeing a man who had not been a
fortnight in the House, and whose life had been chiefly
passed in foreign countries, - assume with confidence, and
discharge with ability, all the functions of a Chancellor of
the Exchequer." He was forty ^four .years old at the
time. ■ ) .

- Roger North describes the financial theories of his
brother, thus; "One is, that trade is not distributed, as
government, }3j' nations and kingdoms, but is one through-

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 69

oi(t the whole world; as the maiu sea, which cannot- be
emptied or replenished in one part, but the whole more or
less will be affected." Another was " concerning money ;
that no nation could wartt inoney (specie), and they would
not abound in it. . . . For if a people want money, they
will give a price for it ; and then merchants, for gain,
bring it and lay it down before them."
. Ebger North, speaking of Sir iDudley and of the Lord
Keeper, says : " These brothers lived with extreme satis-
faction in each other's society; for both had the skill and
knowledge of the world, as to all affairs relating to their
several professions, in perfection, and each was an Indies
to the other, producing always the richest novelties, of
which the best understandings are greedy." < ;

■ The Hon. Dr. John North, Master of Trinity College,
Cambridge, differed in some respects from his brothers,
and resembled them in others : — '

" When he was very young, a.ndalso as he grew lip, he
was of a nitfe and tender constitution— ^ not so vigorous and
athletic as miost of his brothers were." "His temper was
always reserved and studious. ... If anything so early
seemed amiss 'in him, it was a non-natural gravity, which
in youths i.s seldom a good sign, for it argues imbecility x)i
body and mind, or both; but his lay wholly in the
former, for his mental capacity was vigorous, as none
more;" ' '

Thus he became devoted to study, and the whole of his
expenditure went to books ; in other respects he was penu-
rious and hoarding. Consequently, as his brother says,
"he was over-much addicted to thinking, or else- he per-
formed it with niore labour, and intenseness than other men
ordinai'ily do. : . . He was, in a word, the most intense
and passibnate thinker that ever lived, and was in his right
mind." This ruined his health. " His flesh was strangely
flaccid and soft ; his ' going weak and shuflling, often
crossing his legs as if he were tipsy ; his sleep seldom or
never easy, but interrupted with unquiet and painful
dreams — the reposes he had' were short and by snatches ;
his active spirit, had rarely any settlement or rest."

It is evident that he played foolish tricks: with; his brain,

70 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

and the result was that he had a stroke, and utterly broke
up, decaying more and more in mind and body until death
relieved him, set. 38.

There is no doubt that Dr. John North deserved more
reputation than he has obtained, partly owing to his early
death, and partly to his exceeding sensitiveness in respect
to posthumous criticism. He left peremptory orders that
all his MSS. should be burnt. He appears to have been
especially skilled in Greek and Hebrew scholarship.

The Lord Keeper and the Master of Trinity resembled
each other in their painfully shy dispositions and studious
tastes. The curious money-saving propensities were
common to all three brothers. The indolent habits of the
Master of Trinity were shared by Sir Dudley after his
return to England, who would take no exercise what-
ever, but sat all day either at home, or else steering a little
sailing-vessel on the Thames. The Lord Keeper was
always fanciful about his health.

The Hon. Mary North, afterwards Lady Spring, was the
sister of these brothers, and no less gifted than they.
Roger North says —

" Besides the advantage of her person, she had a superior
wit, prodigious memory, and was most agreeable in con-
versation." She used to rehearse " by heart prolix
romances, with the substance of speeches and letters, as
well as passages ; and this with little or no hesitation, but
in a continual series of discourse — the very memory of
which is to me at this day very wonderful."

She died not long after the birth of her iirst child, and
the child died not long after her.

Roger North, the biographer of his brothers, from whom
I have quoted so much, was the author of other works, and
among them is a memoir on Music, showing that he shared
the musical faculty that was strongly developed in the
Lord Keeper. Little is known of his private life. He was
Attorney-General to the consort of James II. Tliere can
be no doubt as to his abilities. The " Lives of the Norths "
is a work of no ordinary writer. It is full of touches of
genius and shrewd perception of character. Roger North
Sterns to have been a most loving and loveable man.

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 71

Charles, the fifth Lord North, was the eldest of the
family, and succeeded to the title ; but he did not, so far
as I am aware, show signs of genius. However, he had a
daughter whose literary tastes were curiously similar. to
those of her imcle. Dr. John. She was a Dudley North,
who, in the words of Roger, " emaciated herself with study,
whereby she had made familiar to her not only the Greek
and Latin, but the Oriental languages." She died early,
having collected a choice library of Oriental works.

I will conclude this description of the family with a
characteristically quaint piece of their biogi'apher'a preface :
" Really, the case is memorable for the happy circumstance
of a flock so numerous and diffused as this of the last
Dudley Lord North's was, and no one scabby sheep, in it."

The nearest collateral relation of the North family by
the Montagu side is Charles Hatton, their first cousin.
He is alluded to three times in Roger North's " Lives,"
and each time with the same epithet — " the incomparable
Charles Hatton." Why he was so distinguished there is
no information, but it is reasonable to accept Roger North's
estimate of his merits, so far as to classify him among the
gifted members of the Montagu family.

I will mention only four more of the kinsmen of the
Norths. The first is their great-uncle, Sir Henry Montagu,
Chief Justice of the King's Bench, and created Earl of
Manchester, who was grandfather to James Montagu, Ch.
B.E. (Geo. III.), and uncle of William, Ch. B. E. (Jas. IL),
both of whom are included in my list. Lord Clarendon
says of Sir Henry, that he was " a man of great industry
and sagacity in business, which he delighted in exceedingly ;
and preserved so great a vigour of mind, even to his death,
that some who had known him in his younger years
did believe him to have much quicker parts in his age
than before."

The second Earl of Manchester, gN. to the Norths, was
the Baron Kimbolton, of Marston Moor, and, as Lord
Campbell says, " one of the most distinguished men who
appeared in the most interesting period of our history ;
having, as Lord Kimbolton, vindicated the liberties of his
country in the Senate, as Earl of Manchester in the field.

72 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

and having afterwards mainly contributed ' to the sup-
pression of anarchy by the, restoration of the royal line." • [

The first Earl of Sandwich; also gN. to the Norths, was
the gallant High Admiral of England in the time 6f
Gharles.II. He began life as, a soldier, when only eighteen
years of age^ with a Parliamentary regiment that he himself
had raised ; and he ended it in a naval battle against the
Dutch' in Southwold Bay. He also trandated a Spanish
work on Metallurgy. I do not know that the book is of
any Value, but the fact is worthy of notice as showing that
he was more than a mere soldier or sailor.

The last of the eminent relations of the Norths of whom
I shall speak at length, was the great-grandson of the
eldest brother, who became the famous Premier — the Lord
North — of the time of the American war. Lord Brougham
says that all contemporaries agree in representing his talents
as having shone with a great and steady lustre during that
singularly trying period. He speaks of a wit that never
failed him, and a" suavity of temper that conld never be
ruffled, as peculiar qualities in which he, and indeed all his
family (his immediate family), excelled most other men.
The admirable description of Lord North by his daughter,
Lady Charlotte Lindsay, that is appended to his bio-
graphy by Lord Brougham, is sufficient proof of that lady's
high ability.

There is yet another great legal family, related to the
Norths, whose plaice in the pedigree I do not know : it is
that of the Hydes,, and includes the illustrious first Earl
of Clarendon. It appears that the Lord Chief Justice
Hyde used to take kindly notice of the Lord Keeper,
Francis North, when a young rising barrister, and allude
to his kinship, artd call him " cousin."

It is want of space, not want of material, that compels
me to conclude the description of the able relatives of the
Norths and Montagus. But I am sure I have said enough
to prove the assertion with which I prefaced it, that natural
gifts of an exceedingly high order were inherited by a
very large number of the members of the family, and that
these owed their reputations to their abilities, and not to
family support,

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 73

Another test of the truth of the hereditary character of
ability is to see whether the near relations of very eminent
men are more frequently eminent than those who are
more remote. Table II. (p. 55) answers this question with
great distinctness in the way I have already explained.
It shows that the near relations of the Judges are far
richer in ability than the more remote — so niuch so, that
the fact of being born in the fourth degree of relationship
is of no sensible benefit at all. The data from which
I obtained column C joi that table are as follow : — I find
that 23 of the Judges are reported to have had " large
families," say consisting of four adult sons in each ; 11
are simply described as having " issue," say at the rate of
1^ sons each ; and that the number of the sons of others
are specified as amounting between them to 586 ; forming
thus far a total of 294. In addition to these, there are
9 reported marriages of judges in which no allusion is
made to children, and there are 31 judges in respect to
whom nothing is said about marriage at all. I think we
are fairly justified, from these data, in concluding^ that
each judge is father, on an average, to not less than one
soil who 'lives to an age at which he might have distin-
guished himself, if he had the ability to do so. I also
find the (adult) families to consist on an average of
not less than 2J sons and 2| daughters each, conse-
quently each judge has an average of 1| brothers and 2^
sisters.

From these data it is perfectly easy to reckon the
number of kinsmen in each order. Thus the nephews
consist of' the brothers' sons and the sisters' sons : now
100 judges are supposed to have 150 brothers and 250
sisters, and each brother and each sister to have, on the
average, only one son ; consequently the 100 judges will
have (150 + 250, or) 400 nephews.

I need not trouble the reader with more figures ; suffice
it to say, I have divided the total numbers of eminent
kinsmen to 100 judges by the number of kinsmen in each
degree, and from that division I obtained the column D
in Table II., which I now project into a genealogical tree
in Table III,

74 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

TABLE III.

Pehcentage of Eminent Men in each Degree of Kinship to the

MOST GIFTED MeMBEE OF DISTINGUISHED FAMILIES.

I Great-grajulfathers.

7g Grandfathers. 'J Great-uncles.

26 FATHERS. 4J Uncles.

I I

The most eminent members of oq T!T(nTHT?'R.c! M Tfirtf rmiiiiii
lOO distinguished families. ^"^ I3KU1 lliiJto. 14 Mtrsl cousins.

36 SONS. 4| Nephews.

9i Grandsons. 2 Great-nephezos.

li Great-grandsons.

It will be observed that Table III. refers only to distin-
guished families. If we modified it to correspond with
column E of Table II., in which all the Judges, whether
they have distinguished relations or no, are considered,
the proportion between the eminent kinsmen in each
different degree would be unchanged, though their abso-
lute numbers would be reduced to about one-third of
their value.

Table III. shows in the most unmistakable manner
the enormous odds that a near kinsman has over one that
is remote, in the chaijce of inheriting ability. Speaking
roughly, the perdentages are quartered at each successive
remove, whether by descent or collaterally. Thus in the
first degi'ee of kinship the percentage is about 28 ; in the
second, about 7 ; and in the third, 1 J.

The table also testifies to another fact, in which people
do not commonly believe. It shows that when we regard
the averages of many instances, the frequent sports of
pature in producing prodigies must be regarded as appa-

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 75

rent, and not as real. Ability, in the long run, does not
suddenly start into existence and disappear with equal
abruptness, but rather, it rises in a gradiial and regular
curve out of the ordinary level of family life. The statistics
show that there is a regular average increase of ability
in the generations that precede its culmination, and as
regular a decrease in those that succeed it. In the
first case the marriages have been consentient to its
production, in the latter they have been incapable of
preserving it.

After three successive dilutions of the blood, the descend-
ants of the Judges appear incapable of rising to eminence.
These results are not surprising even when compared with
the far greater length of kinship through which features
or diseases may be transmitted. Ability must be based
on a triple footing, every leg of which has to be firmly
planted. In order that a man should inherit ability in
the concrete, he must inherit three qualities that are
separate and independent of one another : he must in-
herit capacity, zeal, and vigour; for unless these three,
or, at the very least, two of them are combined, he
cannot hope to make a figure in the world. The proba-
bility against inheriting a combination of three qualities
not correlated together, is necessarily in a triplicate pro-
portion greater than it is against inheriting any one of
them.

There is a marked difference between the percentage of
ability in the grandsons of the judge when his sons (the
fathers of those grandsons) have been eminent than when
they have not. Let us suppose that the son of a judge
wishes to marry : what expectation has he that his own
sons will become eminent men, stipporters of his family,
and not a burden to it, in their after life ?

In the case where the son of the judge is himself emi-
nent, I find, out of the 226 judges previous to the present
reign, 22 whose sons have been distinguished men. I do
not count instances in the present reign, because the
grandsons of these judges are for the most part too young
to have achieved distinction. 22 out of 226 gives 10 in
10-0 as the percentage of the judges that have had distin-

70 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

gwished sons. (The reg-der : will retoark how lieav thi?
result is to the 9| as entered in 'my table, showing' the
general truth of both estimates.) Of these 2? I cpunt^th^
following triplets. The Atkyns family as two.; It, is true
that the grandfather was only Chief Justice of ; North
Wales, and not an English judge, but the vigour of ^the
blood is proved by the line of hot iQnly . his soa and two
grandsons being English judges, but also by the grandson
of one of them, through the female line, being an English
judge also. Another line is that of the Praltts, viz. the
Chief Justice and his son; the Lord Chancellor, Earl
Camden, and his grandson, the son of the Earl, created
the Marquis Camden ; the latter was Chancellor of the
University of Camlaridge, and a man of note in many
ways. Another case is in the Yorke line, for the son of
the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Hardwicke, was Charles
Yorke, hiniself a Lord Chancellor. His sons/were able
men: otie became First Lord of the Admiralty, another
was Bishop* of Ely, a third was a military officer of dis-
tinction and created Baron Dover, a fourth was an admiral
of distinction. I, will not count; all these, but will reckon
them as thre^ favourable iiistances." The total, thus far, is
six ; to which might be added in fairness Something frow
that most remarkable Montagu family and itsconnexionsi,
of which several judges, both before and ^ifter thesaiDces-
sion of Charles I., were members. However, I wish to b§
well within bounds, and therefore will -claim" only six
successes out of the 22 cases (I allow one son to each
judge, as before), or 1 in 4. Even under these Ifmita'-
tions it. is only 4 to 1, on the average, against each
child of an eminent son of a judge becoming a distin-
guished man. -, i ' ^ •

Now for the second category, where the son iS not emi-
nent, but the grandson is. There are only seven of these
cases to the (226 — 22 or) 204 judges that remain, and
one or two of them are not of' a very high order. They
are the third Earl Shaftesbury, author of the " Charac-
teristics ; " Cowper, the poet ; Lord Lechmere, the Attor-
ney-General ; Sir Wm, Mansfield, Commander-in-Chief in
India ; Sir Eardley Willmot; wKq filled various offices with

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 11

credit and was created a baronet ; and Lord Wyndham,
Lord Chancellor of Ireland. Fielding, the novelist, was
grandson of Judge Gould, by the female line. Hence it
is 204 to 7, or 30 to 1, against the non-eminent son of
a judge having an eminent child.

The iigures in these two categories are clearly too few
to justify us in relying on them, except so far as to show
that the probability of a judge having an eminent grand-
son is largely increased if his sons are also eminent. It
follows that the sons or daughters of distinguished men
who are themselves gifted with decidedly high ability, as
tested at the University or elsewhere, cannot do better
than marry early in life. If they have a large family, the
odds are in their favour that one at least of their children
will be eminently successful in life, and will be a subject of
pride to them and a help to the rest.

Let us for a moment consider the bearing of the facts
j^ust obtained, on the theory of an aristocracy where able
men earn titles, aiid transmit them by descent through the
line of their eldest male representatives. The practice
may be justified on two distinct grounds. On the one
hand; the future peer is reared in a home full of family
tradition?, that-forni his disposition. On the other hand,
he is presumed to inherit the ability of the founder of the
family. The former is a real justification for the law of
primogeniture, as applied to titles and possessions; the
latter, as we see from the table, is not, A man who has
no able ancestor nearer in blood to him than a great-
grandparent, is inappreciably better off in the chance of
being himself gifted with ability, than if he had been taken
out of the general mass of men. An old peerage is a
valueless title to natural gifts, except so far as it may
have been furbished up by a succession of wise inter-
marriages. When, however, as is often the case, the direct
line has become extinct and the title has passed to a
distant relative, who had not been reared in the family
traditions, the sentiment that is attached to its possession
is utterly unreasonable. I cannot think of any claim to
respect, put forward in modern days, that is so entirely
an imposture, as that made by a peer on the ground of

78 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

descent, who lias neither been nobly educated, nor has any
eminent kinsman, within three degrees.

I will conclude this chapter with a few facts I have
derived from my various jottings, concerning the " natural
history " of Judges. It appears that the parentage of the
Judges in the last six reigns, viz. since the accession of
George I., is as follows, reckoning in percentages : noble,
honourable, or baronet (but not judges), 9 ; landed gen-
tlemen, 35 ; judge, barrister, or attorney, 15 ; bishop or
clergyman, 8 ; medical, 7 ; merchants and various, un-
classed, 10 ; tradesmen, 7 ; unknown, I). There is, there-
fore, no very marked class peculiarity in the origin of the
Judges. They seem to be derived from much the same
sources as the scholars of our Universities, with a decided
but not excessive preponderance in favour of legal parents.

I also thought it worth while to note the order in which
the Judges stood in their several families, to see whether
ability affected the eldest more than the youngest, or if
any important fact of the kind might appear. I find in
my notes that I have recorded the order of the birth of
72 judges. The result of the percentages is, that the judge
was an only son in 11 cases ; eldest in 17 ; second in 38 ;
third in 22 ; fourth in 9 ; fifth in 1 ; and of a yet later
birth in 2 instances. It is clear that the eldest sons do
not succeed as judges half as well as the cadets, I suppose
that social influeaces are, on the whole, against their
entering, or against their succeeding at the law.

BETWEEW 1660 AND 1865 79

APPENDIX TO JUDGES

There have been 286 Judges, according to the "Lives of the Judges,"
by Foss, lietween the accession of Charles II. and the year 1864. No less
than 112 of them find a place in the following list. Among the Judges are
included the Lord Chancellors, 30 in number, and of these eminent officers
no less than 24, or 80 per cent, of the whole, will be found to have eminent
relations.

Contractimis employed in the List.

The name of a Sovereign in parentheses, as (Charles II.), shows the latest
reign in which each judge held office.

Ch. K. B. (or Q. B.) = Chief Justice of the King's (or Queen's) Bench.

Just. K. B. (orQ. B.) = Justice of the King's (or Queen's) Bench.

Ch. B. E. = Chief Baron of the Exchequer.

B. E. = Baron of the Exchequer.

Curs. B. E. = Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer.

Ch. C. P. = Chief Justice of the Common Pleas.

Just. C. P. = Justice of the Common Pleas.

M. R. = Master of the KoUs.

Abinger, Lord. See Scarlett.
Abney, Sir Thomas ; Just. C. P (Geo. II.)
U. Sir Thomas Abney, a famous Lord Mayor of London ;
one of the promoters of the Bank of England ; pro-
tector of Dr. Isaac Watts. See Watts' Elegy on him.
[F.] Sir Edward Abney, LL.D. and M.P., a man of import-
ance in his day.
Alderson, Sir Edward Hall ; B. E. (Vict.)
r. Recorder of Norwich, Ipswich, and Yarmouth.
TJs. Mrs. Opie, the novelist.
Alibone, Sir Richard; Just. K. B. (James II.)
G. Eminent Protestant divine. (P. turned Papist.)

80 I'HE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Atkyns, Sir Edward; B. E. (Charles II.)
[G.] Thomas, twice Reader in Lincoln's Inn.
F. Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales.
S. Sir Robert, Ch. Just. C. P. (Will. III.)
S. Sir Edward, B. E. (James II.)

PS. Sir John Tracy, who assumed his mother's name of
Atkyns, Curs. B. E. (Geo. III.)

Thomas, Reader in Lincoln's Inn.

Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales.

Sir Edward, B.E. (Chas. IL)

Sir Robert, Ch. Just. C. P. Sir Edward, B. E. (James IL)

I
Daughter.

Sir J. Tracy (Atkyns), Curs. B. E.

Atkyns, Sir Robert ; Ch. C. P. (Will. III.)
G. Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales.

F. Sir Edward,. B. E. (Charles II.)
B. Sir Edward, B. E. (James II.)

p. Sir John Tracy, who assumed the name of Atkyns, Curs.
B. E.
Atkyns, Sir Edward ; B. E. (James II.)

G. Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales.
F. Sir Edward, B. E. (Charles II.)
B. Sir Robert, Ch. C. P.

Bp. Sir J. Tracy, assumed name of Atkyns, Curs. B. E.
Atkyns, Sir John Tracy, (his mother was named Atkyns, 9,nd
he adopted her name) ; Curs. B. E. (Geo. III.^

g. Sir Robert Atkyns, Ch. C. P.

gB. Sir Edward Atkyns, B. E. (James II.)

gP.' Sir Edward Atkyns, B. E. (Charles II.)
Bathurst, Henry ; 2d Earl of Bathurst ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo.

™-)

F. The first Earl, an accomplished wit.

n. Sir Francis Buller, Just. K. B., the famous judge; (Geo.

III.)
Bedingfield, Sir Henry ; Ch. C. P. (James 11.)
U. Sir Thomas Bedingfield, Just. C. P. (Charles I.)
Best, Wm. Draper ; created Ld. Wynford ; Ch. 0. P. (Geo.' IV.)
g. General Sir William Draper, the well-known antagonist
of " Junius."

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1.865 81

Bickersteth, Henry ; created Lord Langdale ; W. R. (Vict. )

u. Dr. Batty, the famous physician.
Birch, Sir John ; Curs. B. E. (Geo. II.)
[U.] Colonel Thomas Birch, well known under the Common-
wealth.
Blackburn, Sir Colin ; Just. Q. B. (Vict.)
B. Professor of Mathematics at Glasgow,
g. Rev. John Gillies, LL.D., historian, and successor to Dr.
Robertson (the gr. uncle of Lord Brougham) as
historiographer of Scotland.
Blackstone, Sir William ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.)
S. His second son held all his University preferments.
N. Henry, wrote " Reports " that were even more popular

than his own.
Bramston, Sir Francis; B. B. (Charles II.)

F. Sir John Bramston, Ch. K. B. under Charles I.
Browne, Samuel ; Just. C. P. (Charles 11.)

uS. Oliver St. John, Ch. Just. C. P. under the Protectorate.
Brougham, Henry ; cr. Ld. Brougham ; Ld. Chanc. (Will.

gB. Robertson, the historian.
BuUer, Sir Francis ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.)

U. William BuUer, Bishop of Exeter.

u. Earl of Bathur.st, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. III.)

N. Rt. Hon. Charles BuUer, statesman.
Burnet, Sir Thomas ; Just. C. P. (Geo. II.)

G. Eminent Scotch lawyer, titled Lord Cramond.
F. The celebrated Whig bishop. Bishop Burnet,

Camden, Earl. See Pratt.

Campbell, Lord ; Lord Chancellor. (Vict.)

[G.] Eminently successful scholar at St. Andrew's.

[F.J Had distinguished literary attainments ; was pious and
eloquent.

N. George Campbell, member of Supreme Court of Calcutta ;
writer on Indian politics.
Chelmsford,. Lord. See Thbsiger.
Churchill, Sir John ; M. R. (James II.)

GN. John Churchill, the great Duke of Marlborough.

GNS. Duke of Berwick, great general.
Clarendon, Earl. See Hyde.
Clarke, Sir Charles ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. II.)

B. Dean of Chester.

u. Charles Trimnell, Bishop of Winchester.

a

82 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Clive, Sir Edward ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.)
U. Sir George CUve, Curs. B. E. (Geo. II.)
UP. The great Lord Clive, Governor-General of India.
Clive, Sir George ; Curs. B. E. (Geo. II.)
N. Sir Edward Clive, Just. C. P. (Geo. III.)
NS. The son of another nephew was the great Lord Clive.
Cockburn, Sir Alexander James ; Ch. Q. B. (Vict.)

[F.] Envoy and Minister Plenipotentiary to Columbia.
Coleridge, Sir John Taylor; Just. Q. B. (Vict.)
U. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, poet and metaphysician. See
under Poets. (He was father of Hartley, Derwent,
and Sara.)
US. Hartley Coleridge, poet.
US. Edward, Master at Eton.
US. Derwent Coleridge, Principal of St. Mark's College,

Chelsea.
U/S'. Sara Coleridge, authoress. (Married her cousin, Henry

Nelson Coleridge.)
US. Henry Nelson Coleridge (son of Col. Coleridge, brother

of Samuel Taylor C), author.
S. Sir John Duke Coleridge, Solicitor-General.
Cooper, Sir Anthony Ashley ; created Earl of Shaftesbury ;
Lord Chancellor. (Charles II.)
P. The 3d Earl, author of the " Characteristics."
Copley, Sir John Singleton ; cr. Ld. Lyndhurst ; Ld. Chanc.
(Vict.)
P. A painter, and an eminent one, judging from the prices
that his pictures now fetch.
Cottenham, Lord. See Pbpys.
Cowper, Sir "Wm. ; created Earl Cowper; Ld. Chanc. (Geo.

!•)
B. Sir Spencer Cowper, Just. C. P. (Geo. II.)

NS. The grandson of Sir Spencer was Cowper the poet. See

Poets.
Co\wper, Sir Spencer; Just. C. P. (Geo. II.)

B. 1st Earl Cowper, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. I.)

P. William Cowper, the poet.
Cranworth, Lord. See Eolpe.
Dampier, Sir Henry; Just. K. B. (Geo. III.)

F. Dean of Durham.

B. Bishop of Ely.

De Grey, Sir Wm. ; cv. Lord Walsingham ; Ch. C. P. (Geo.
III.)

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 83

S. Thomas, 2d Baron ; for twenty years Chairman of Com-
mittees in House of Lords.
Denison, Sir Thomas ; Just. K. B. (Geo. III.)
4 NS. and [2 NS.] His brother was grandfather to a remark-
able family of six brothers, namely, the present Speaker
of the House of Commons, the Bishop of Salisbury, the
Archdeacon of Taunton, the ex-Governor of South
Australia, and two others, both of whom are scholars.
Denman, Sir Thomas ; created Lord Denman ; Ch. Q. B.
(Vict.)
F. Physician, a celebrated accoucheur.
S. Hon. George Denman, Q.C., M.P., and the first classic of

his year, 1842, at Cambridge.
uS. Sir Benjamin Brodie, 1st Bart., the late eminent

surgeon.
uP. The present Sir Benjamin Brodie, 2d Bart., Professor
of Chemistry at Oxford.
Dolben, Sir William ; Just. K. B. (Will. III.)
S. Sir Gilbert Dolben, Just. C. P. in Ireland, created a

Bart.
B. John Dolben, Archbishop of York.

gB. Archbishop John Williams, the Lord Keeper to James I.
Eldon, Lord. See Scott.
Ellenborough, Lord. SeeljAVf.
Erie, Sir William ; Ch. C. P. (Vict.)
B. Peter Erie, Commissioner of Charities.
Erskine, Thomas; cr. Ld. Erskine ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo

in.)

B. Henry Erskine, twice Lord Advocate of Scotland.
S. Hon. Sir Thomas Erskine, Just. C. P. (Vict.)
Erskine, Hon. Sir Thomas; Just. C. P. (Vict.)
F. Lord Erskine, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. III.)
U. Henry Erskine, twice Lord Advocate of Scotland.
Eyre, Sir Robert; Ch. C. P. (Geo. II.)

F. Sir Samuel Eyre, Just. K. B. (Will. III.)
Eyre, Sir Samuel ; Just. K. B. (Will. III.)
S. Sir Robert Eyre, Ch. C. B. (Geo II.)

[Sir Giles Eyre, Just. K. B. (Will. III.), was only his 2d
cousin.]
Finch, Sir Heneage ; cr. E. of Nottingham ; Ld. Chanc.
(Chas. II.)
F. Sir Heneage Finch, Recorder of London, Speaker of the
House of Commons,

G 2

THE JUDGES OF ESTGLAND

Hyde, Sir Edward, continued —
[/S'.] Anne, married to the Duke of York, afterwards James II.
A woman of strong character, who insisted, in spite of
menace, that publicity should be given to the marriage,
let the consequences be what they might.

Family of Hyde.

I I

Sir Lawrence, Sir Nicholas,

Attorney-Gen. to Consort of James I. Ch. K. B.

,( \ \ VT\

Robert, Fradei'ick, Alexander, 3 others, all 1st Earl of Clarendon,
Ch. K. 13. Judge, Wales. Bishop, distinguished. Ld. Chanc. & historian.

I \ I

Henry, Lawrence, Anne,

2d Earl. cr. E. Rochester, marr. Jas. IL

I
Duchess of Queensberry,
patroness of Gray, the poet.

Hyde, Sir Eobort; Ch. K. B. (Charles II.)

F., 2 B., [3 B.], U., and US. See above.
Jeffreys, Geo. ; cr. Ld. Jeffreys of Wem ; Ch. K. B., Ld. Chanc.
(Jas. II.)

G. A judge in N. Wales.

U^. Sir John Trevor, M. E. (Geo. I.)
Jervis, Sir John; Ch. C. P. (Vict.)

F. Ch. Justice of Chester.

GN. J. Jervis, Admiral, 1st Earl St. Vincent. See Pakkee.

Pakker.

X Earl Macclesfield,

JunviB. - I Ld. Chanc. (Geo. L)

I I ' I

X X =; Sister. Sir Thos. Parker,

I I Ch. B. E. (Geo. in.)

X Admiral,

I 1st Earl St. Vincent.

Sir John Jervis,

Ch. C. P. (Vict.)

Keating, Sir Henry Singer ; Just. C. P. (Vict.)
F. Sir Henry Keating, K.C.B., distinguished in India, &c.

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865

King, Sir Peter ; created Lord King ; Ld. Chancellor. (Geo.
II.)
u. John Locke, the philosopher.
Langdale, Lord. See Bickeestetii.
Law, Sir Edward ; cr. Ld. Ellenborough ; Ch. K. B. (Geo,

in.)

F. E. Law, Bishop of Carlisle, author.

S. Edward, Governor-General of India, cr. Earl Ellen-
borough.
S. C. Ewan, Recorder of London and M.P. for Camb.

University.
B. G. H., Bishop of Bath and Wells.
B. John, Bishop of Elphin, in Ireland.

There are many other men of ability in this family.
Lawrence, Sir Soulden ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.)
F. President of the College of Physicians.
Lechmere, Sir Nicholas ; B. E. (Will. IH.)
P. Nicholas Lechmere, Attorney-Gen., created Baron

Lechmere.
u. Sir Thomas Overbury, poet (poisoned).
Lee, Sir William ; Ch. K. B. (Geo. II.)
B. George, Dean of the Arches and Judge of the Prerogative
Court of Canterbury. Thus the two brothers were
simultaneously, the one at the head of the highest
court of Common Law, and the other of the highest
court of Civil Law; a similar case to that of Lords
Eldon and Stowell.
Legge, Hon. Heneage; B. E. (Geo. II)

F. William, 1st Earl of Dartmouth, Secretary of State, &c.

G. George, 1st Baron Dartmouth, Master of the Ordnance

and Admiral of the Fleet,
g. 1st Lord Aylesford, Attorney- General and eminent

lawyer.
gF, (Father of Lord Aylesford) was the 1st Earl of Notting-
ham, Lord Chancellor (see Finch).
Lifford, Lord. See Hewitt.
Lovell, Sir Salathiel ; B. E. (Anne.)
pS. Was Richard Lovell Edgeworth, author.
pP, Maria Edgeworth, novelist.
Lyndhurst, Lord. See Copley.
Lyttleton, Sir Timothy ; B. E. (Charles II.)
GG. Sir Thomas Lyttleton, the eminent judge under
Edward IV.

MONTAGU AND NORTH.

{See also under " Literatfee "for Sydney.)

Lord Rich, Edward, 1st Baron North ;

Lord Chancellor, Cliancellor of Court of AugmentationB,

Sir Valentine

Dale,

Master of the

Requests.

Daxighter. = Rooer, 2rl Baron ;
Ambassador.

S*ii Thomas,
a learned man,

Si3. John Jeffreys,
Ch. B. Exuh.

Daughter. = Sir Johm North.

Sir Ralph ]

AVlNWOOI>.

Prin. Sec. to
Jam* s I.

: Si n Edward,

1st Baron
Montagu.

Sir Henry,

Ch. Jiiat. K. B.

1st Karl Manchester.

3d Baron North,

literary.

" Full of spirit

and flame."

Sir Charles.

Anne=Edward,

2 I Baron
Montagiu

Ralph,

3d Baron ;

Ambassador ;

created

Duke of

Montagu.

William,
Ch. B.

Bxch.

Edward, Georgi:.

2d Earl.

The Baron

Kimbolton

of Marston Moor.

Wali'er, Dudley North, = Akne Montagu,
Abbutof 4th Baron North. [ " Compendium of
Pontoise. I cliarlty and wisdom."

Robert,
3d Eirl.

Charles, James,

1st Earl of Ch. B.

Halifax; Exch.

Statesman.

Charles,
6th Baron.

Charles, 4tli

Eiirl Manchester.

Premier, 1701.

1st Duke of

Manchester.

Francis, Dudley,
Ld. Keeper; Financier.
1 st Baron ^
Ouilford.

d. s. p.

William,
6th Baron.
Served'
under Marl-
borough.

d. s. p.

DuDLEVA Francis,

Scholar, ' 2d Baron

Orientalist. Guilford.

Francis,

Sd Barnn

and 1st Eirl

Guilford.

Frederick,

2d Earl. The Lord Nortll,

Premier to George III.

Sir John Finnieox,
Ch. Jnst. King's Bench,

Daughter. :

; John Ropkr,
Attorney-General,
Henry VIII.

Ellen Ropeb, = Sib. Edward Montagu,
(his 3(1 wife). Cliief Justice, King's
Bench.

Sir John Harrington,

Treasurer of Army at

Boulogne to Henry VIII.

Sir James = Lucy Sidney,
Harrington. sister of Sir
Henry Sidney.

Sir Edward Montagu. = Elizabeth Harrington.

John, cventod Barnn Harrington,

Tutor lo Princess Elizabethj

daughter of James 1.

James,

Bishop of

Bath and Wells.

Daughter. = Lord
, Hatton.

Em SVDNliV,=PAULlNA

Master of Tepys.
Court of

Sir Edward,
1st Earl of
Sandwich;
Lord High
Admiral.

Brother.

Samuel

Pepys.

(His

"Diary,")

I
Brother.

Richard
Pepys,

Ch. Just.

of
Ireland.

Theodosia. :

Sir Henry

Capel.

Arthur Capel, 1st Baron
Capel of Hadham. Be-
headed, 1648, as a Royalist.

John, Roger, Mary. Charles

D. D. the Prodigious Hatton.

Master biogi'apher, memory. *' Tlie Incom-

of Trin. I parable."

ColL V

Arthur,
1st Earl of

Essex ;

Viceroy of

Ireland.

D. in Tower.

Henry, 1st
Baron Capel
of Tewkes-
bury ; Lord
Lieut, of Ire-
land.

90

THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Lyttleton, Sir Timothy, continued —
g. Sir E. "Walter, Ch. Justice of S. Wales,
u. Sir John Walter, Ch. B. E. (Charles I.)
F. Sir Edward Lyttleton, Ch. Justice of N. Wales.
B. Edward, Lord Lyttleton, Lord Keeper. (Charles I.)
N^. Sir Thomas Lyttleton, Speaker of the House of

Commons, 1698. (His mother was daughter of the

Lord Keeper.)

Sir Thos. Lyttleton, the eminent judge.

Kicliarcl,
eminent lawyer.

1

Sir Edmund Walter,

Ch. Just. S. Wales.

I

Sir Edward,
Judge, N. Wales.

Sir J. Walter,
Ch. B. E.

Edward,
Lord Keeper.

Timothy,
B. E.

1

Sergeant-at-law.

X = O

Sir Thos. Lyttleton, Speaker H. Commons.

Macclesfield, Lord. See Parkee.
Manners, Lord. See Sutton.
Mansfield, Sir James; Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.)
P. General Sir William Mansfield,' K.C.B., Commander-in-
chief in India.
[There are other gifted brothers.]
Milton, Sir Christopher ; Just. C. P. (James II.)
B. Milton the poet. See under Poets.

[Milton's mother was a kinswoman (? what) of Lord
President Bradshaw, the I'egicide.]
Montagu, Sir William ; Ch. B. E. (James II.)
F. Created Baron Montagu.

FB. Sir Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester, Ch. K. B.
(James I.)

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 91

Montagu, Sir William, continued —
N. Created Duke of Montagu ; statesman.
g. Sir John Jeffreys, Ch. B. E.
GF. Sir Edward Montagu, Oh. K. B. (Henry VIII.)

(See pedigree pp. 88, 89.)

Montagu, Sir J. ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. I.)
G. Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester, Ch. K. B.
U. Walter, Abbot of Pontoise ; poet, courtier, councillor to

Marie de Medicis.
U. Edward, 2d Earl of Manchester, the successful Parlia-
mentary General, Baron Kimbolton of Marston Moor.
GB. 1st Baron Montagu.

UP. (Grandson of Baron Kimbolton.) The 4th Earl of
Manchester, Principal Secretary of State, 1701, created
1st Duke of Manchester.
Nares, Sir George ; Just. 0. P. (Geo. III.)
S. Regius Professor of Modern History at Oxford.
B. Dr. James Nares, musician.
North, Francis; created Ld. Guilford; Ld. Chanc. (James

B. Dudley North, Levantine merchant, eminent English

financier.
B. Rev. John North, D.D., scholar. Master of Trin. Coll.

Camb.
B. Roger North, the biographer ; Attorney-General to the

Queen.
b. Mary, had a prodigious memory.
uS. Charles Hatton, " the incomparable.'' (-S'ee " Lives of

the Norths.")
gB. Sir Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester. See Mon-
tagu, Sir J.
gN. Edward, 2d Earl of Manchester, the Baron Kimbolton

of Marston Moor.
gN. George Montagu, Abbot of Pontoise, courtier and

minister of Catherine de Medicis.
.tN. Sir Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich. (His unt-Ie

[u.] -was Pepys, "his Diary.")
[K] Dudleya North, Oriental scholar.
PS. Frederick, 2d Earl Guilford, Premier. (The " Lord

North" of George III.'s reign.)
Northington, Lord. See Henley.
Nottingham, Earl of. See Finch.

92 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Parker, Sir Thomas ; cr. E. of Macclesfield ; Ld. Chanc.

(Geo. I.)
S. 2d Earl, President of the Royal Society, mathematician

and astronomer.
UP. Sir Thomas Parker, Ch. B. E.
Parker, Sir Thomas j Ch. B. E. (Geo. III.)
n. John Jervis, admiral, 1st Earl St. Vincent. See

Jervis.
GN. Sir T. Parker, 1st Earl of Macclesfield, Lord Chancellor.
Patteson, Sir John ; Just. K. B. (Vict.)
S. Missionary Bishop to Pacific Islands.
Pengelly, Sir Thomas ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. II.)
[G.] (Reputed, but questionable.) Oliver Cromwell. (Foss's
"Judges.")
Pepys, Sir Chas. Christopher ; cr. E. of Cottenham ; Ld. Chanc.
(Vict.)
[F.] A Master in Chancery.
G. Sir L. Pepys, physician to George III.
g. Rt. Hon. W. Dowdeswell, Chancellor of the Exche

quer.
B. Bishop of Worcester.
Pollock, Sir Frederick ; Ch. B. E- (Vict.)
B. Sir David, Ch. Justice of Bombay.
B. Sir George, general in Affghanistan.
S. Frederick, Master in Chancery ; translator of Dante.
[P.] Frederick (also [p.] to the Right Hon. C. Herries, Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) ; second classic of his year,
1867, at Cambridge.
Powis, Sir Lyttleton ; Just. K. B. (Geo. I.)
B. Sir Thomas Powis, Ju.st. K. B. (Geo. I.)
Powis, Sir Thomas ; Just. K. B. (Geo. I.)
B. Sir Lyttleton Powis, Just. K. B. (Geo. I.)
Pratt, Sir John ; Ch. K. B. (Geo. I.)
S. Sir Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden, Ld. Chanc. (Geo.

m.)

P. J. J. Pratt, 2d Earl and created 1st Marquis Camden,
Lord Lieut, of Ireland, Chancellor of University of
Cambridge.

p. George Hardinge. {See next paragraph.)

ps. Field Marshal 1st Visct. Hardinge, Governor-Gen. of
India.

[ps.] {See next paragraph.)

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865

Pratt, Sir Charles ; cr. Earl Camden ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. III.)

F. Sir John Pratt, Ch. K. B. (Geo. I.)

S. J. J. Pratt, 2d Earl and created Marquis of Camden,

Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and Chancellor of the

University of Cambridge.

n. George Hardinge, Attorney-General to the Queen, Chief

Justice of the Brecon Circuit.
nS. Field Marshal 1st Viscount Hardinge, Governor-General

of India. (His father was a literary man.)
[nS.]A naval Captain, to whom a monument in St. Paul's

was voted by the nation.
Raymond, Sir Edward ; cr. Ld. Raymond ; Ch. K. B. (Geo.

IL)
F. Sir Thomas Raymond, a Judge in each of the three Courts,

(Charles II.)
Raymond, Sir Thomas ; Just. K. B. &c, (Charles II.)
S. Robert, Lord Raymond, Ch. K. B. (Geo. II.)
Reynolds, Sir James (1) ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. IL)
N. Sir James Reynolds (2), B. E. (Geo. II.)
Reynolds Sir James (2) ; B. E. (Geo. IL)
U. Sir James Reynolds (1), Ch. B. E. (Geo. II.)
Rolfe, Sir Robt. Monsey ; cr. Ld. Cran worth ; Ld. Chanc.
(Vict.)
GrN. Admiral Lord Nelson.
gF. Dr. Monsey, the celebrated and eccentric physician to

Chelsea Hospital.
Romilly, Sir John ; created Lord Romilly ; M. R. (Vict.)
F. Sir Samuel Romilly, Solicitor-General and eminent jurist.
Scarlett, Sir James ; created Lord Abinger ; Ch. B .E. (Vict. )
[B.] Sir William Scarlett, Ch. Justice of Jamaica.
S. Gen. Sir James Scarlett, chief in command of the cavalry

in the Crimea ; then Adjutant-General.
S. Sir Peter Campbell Scarlett, diplomatist.
Scott, Sir John ; created Earl of Eldon ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. IV.)
B. Sir William Scott, created Lord Stowell, Judge of the
High Court of Admiralty. (See remarks under Ch.
Just. Sir W. Lee.)
Sewell, Sir Thomas ; M. R. (Geo. III.)
p. Matthew G. Lewis, novelist, commonly called "Monk"
Lewis.
Shaftesbury, Earl of. See Cooper.

Somers, Sir J. ; created Earl Somers ; Lord Chanc,
(Will. III.)

94 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Somers, Sir J., continued —
iVS. Charles Yorke, Ld. Chanc. (Geo. III.)
N^. and 2 NV. See Yohke.
gNP. Richard Gibbon, the historian.
Spelman, Sir Clement; Curs. B. E. (Charles II.)
GF. Just. K. B. (Henry VIII.)
F. Sir Henry, antiquarian author of celebrity.
[B.] Sir John Spelman, also an antiquarj'. "Alfred the
Great."
Sutton, Sir Thomas Manners; B. E. ; subsequently Lord
Chancellor of Ireland, and created Lord Manners.
(Geo. III.)
B. Charles Sutton, Archbishop of Canterbury.
N. (Son of the Archbishop.) Charles Manners Sutton,
Speaker of the House of Commons, created Viscount
Canterbury.
Talbot, Hon. Chas. ; cr. Lord Talbot ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. II.)
F. Bishop successively of three sees.

N. Rev. William Talbot, an early and eminent advocate of

Evangelism. {See Venn's Life, Pi-eface, p. xii.)

Thesiger, Sir Frederick ; cr. Ld. Chelmsford ; Ld. Chanc.

. (Vict.)
S. Adjutant-General of India.

[G., F., U.] All noteworthy, but hardly of sufficient eminence
to be particularly described in this meagre outline of
relationships.
Thurlow, Edward • cr. Lord Thurlow ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. III.)
B. Bishop of Durham.

[S.] (Illegitimate.) Died at Cambridge, where, as is said, he
was expected to attain the highest honours.
Treby, Sir George ; Ch. C. P. (Will. III.)
S. Rt. Hon. Robert Treby, Secretary at War.
Trevor, Sir Thomas ; created Lord Trevor ; Ch. 0. P. (Geo.

I.)

g. J. Hampden, the patriot.

F. Sir John Trevor, Secretary of State.

S. Bishop of Durham.

U. Sir John Trevor, Ch. B. E. (Charles I.)

GB. Sir Thomas Trevor, B. E. (Charles I.)
Trevor, Sir John ; M. R. (Geo. I.)

uS. Lord Jeffreys, Lord Chancellor. (James II.)
Truro, Lord. See Wilde.
Turner, Sir George James; Lord Justice. (Vict)

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865

Turner, Sir George James, continued —
TJ. Dawson Turner, botanist and antiquary.
TJ. Dean of Norwich and Master of Pembroke Coll., Cam-
bridge.
[S.] Bishop of Grafton and Armidale, in Australia.
(There are numerous other distinguished members of this
family, including Dr. Hooker, the botanist, Gilford
Palgrave, the Arabian traveller, and Francis Palgrave,
author.)
Twisden, Sir Thomas; Just. K. B. (Charles II.)
uS. Earl of Nottingham (Finch), Lord Chancellor. (Chas. II.)
[B.] Roger, antiquary and historian.
Vaughan, Sir John; Just. C. P. (Vict.)
B. Henry Vaughan, assumed name of Halford and became
the celebrated physician. Sir Henry Halford, 1st Bart.
B. Rev. Edward (of Leicester), Calvinist theologian.
B. Sir Charles R., Envoy Extraordinary to the United

States.
[B.] Peter, Dean of Chester.

N. Rev. Charles Vaughan, D.D., joint first classic of his
year, 1838, at Cambridge; Head Master of Harrow;
refused two bishoprics.
N. Professor Halford Vaughan, of Oxford.
p. Vaughan Hawkins, first classic of his year, 1854, at
Cambridge.
Verney, Hon. Sir John ; M. R. (Geo. IL)

g. Sir R. Heath, Ch. K. B. (Charles I.)
Walsingham, Lord. See Dk Grey.
Wigram, Sir James ; V. C. (Vict.)

B. Bishop of Rochester.
Wilde, Sir Thomas ; created Lord Truro ; Ld. Chanc. (Vict.)
B. Ch. Justice, Cape of Good Hope.

N. Sir James Wilde, B. E. (Vict.) ; now Lord Penzance.
Wilde, Sir James Blasted ; B. E. (Vict.) ; since cr. Ld.
Penzance.
U. Lord Truro, Lord Chancellor. (Vict.)
U. Ch. Justice, Cape of Good Hope.
Willes, Sir John ; Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.)
B. Bishop of Bath and Wells.
S. Sir Edward Willes, Just. K. B. (Geo. III.)
Willes, Sir Edward ; Just. K. B. (Geo. III.)
F. Sir John Willes, Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.)
U. Bishop of Bath and Wells.

96 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND

Wilmot, Sir John Eardley ; Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.)
P. F.R.S. and F.A.S., Governorof Van Diemen's Land, and

1st Baronet.
PS. Recorder of Warwickshire and Judge of the County Court
of Bristol.
Wood, Sir William Page ; V. C. (Vict.) (Since created
Lord Hatherley, Lord Chancellor, 1868.)
P. Sir Matthew, M.P. for London for twenty-eight years
and twice Lord Mayor.

[U.l Benjamin Wood, M.P. for Southwark.

Western Wood, M.P. for London.
Wyndham, Sir Hugh ; B. E., C. P. (Charles II.)
B. Sir William Wyndham, Just. K. B. (Charles II.)
GIST. Sir JjTancis Wyndham, Just. C. P. (Eliz.)
NS. Thomas Wyndham, Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Geo. I.),

created Baron Wyndham.
Wyndham, Sir Wadham; Just. K. B. (Charles II.)
B. Sir Hugh Wyndham, B. E., Just. C. P. (Charles II.)
P. Thomas Wyndham, Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Geo.

I. ), created Baron Wyndham.
GN. Sir Francis Wyndham, Just. C. P. (Eliz.)

Wr

NDHAM Family.

1

X

1

X

1

1

X

1

1
Francis, Just. C.

P

!' 1

X . X Hugh

Just.

C.

1
P. Wadham, Just. K. B.

■ — , Sergeant-
i at-law.

1

X

Thomas, Ld. Chanc. Ireland,
created Baron Wyndh.am.

Rt. Hon. Wm. Wyndham.

Wynford, Lord. See Best.

Yorke, Philip ; cr. Earl of Hardwicke ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo.

S. Hon. Charles (by niece of Lord Chancellor Somers), Lord
Chancellor. (Geo. III.)

S. Hon. James, Bishop of Ely.

P. Philip, 3d Earl, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.

P. Et. Hon. Charles Philip, E.R.S., First Lord of the Ad-
miralty.

BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865

97

Yorke, Philip, contimied —
PS, Lord Goderich and Earl of Ripon, Premier.

O =

^ John Somers,

1st Earl Somers, Ld. Chanc.

R. Gibbon,
the historian.

O = Philip Yorke, 1st E.
I Hardwicke, Ld. Chan.

Charles,
Ld. Chan.

James,
Bishop of Ely.

O

Philip, 3d Earl,
Lord Lieut. Ireland.

Chas. Philip,
1st Lord Adm.

F. J. Robinson,
1st Earl Ripon, Premier.

Yorke, Hon. Charles ; Lord Chancellor. (Geo. III.)
F. ist Earl of Hardwicke, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. IL)
S. Philip, 3d Earl, Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland.
S. Rt. Hon. Charles Philip, F.R S., First Lord of the Admi-
ralty.
E. Hon. James, Bishop of Ely.
gh. 1st Earl Somers, Lord Chancellor. (Will. III.)
iVS. Lord Goderich and Earl of Ripon, Premier.

STATESMEN

STATESMEN

I PEOPOSE in this chapter to discuss the relationships of
modern EngHsh Statesmen. It is my earnest desire,
throughout this book, to steer safely between two dangers :
on the one hand, of accepting mere official position or
notoriety, as identical with a more discriminative reputa-
tion, and on the other, of an unconscious bias towards
facts most favourable to my argument. In order to guard
against the latter danger, I employ groups of names
selected by others; and, to guard against the former,
I adopt selections that command general confidence. It
is especially important in dealing with statesmen, whose
eminence, as such, is largely affected by the accident of
social position, to be cautious in both these respects. It
would not be a judicious plan to take for otir select list
the names of privy councillors, or even of Cabinet
ministers; for though some of them are illustriously
gifted, and many are eminently so, yet others belong to a
decidedly lower natural grade. For instance, it seemed
in late years to have become a mere incident to the
position of a great territorial duke to have a seat in the
Cabinet, as a minister of the Crown. No doubt some few
of the dukes are highly gifted, but it may be affirmed,
with equal assurance, that the abilities of the large
majority are very far indeed from justifying such an
appointment.

Again, the exceptional position of a Cabinet minister

STATESMEN 99

cannot possibly be a just criterion of a correspondingly
exceptional share of natural gifts, because statesmanship
is not an open profession. It was much more so in the
days of pocket-boroughs, when young men of really high
promise were eagerly looked for by territorial magnates,
and brought into Parliament, and kept there to do gladia-
torial battle for one or other of the great contending
parties of the State. With those exceptions, parliamen-
tary life was not, even then, an open career, for only
favoured youths were admitted to compete. But, as is
the case in every other profession, none, except those who
are extraordinarily and peculiarly gifted, are likely to
succeed in parliamentary life, unless engaged in it from
their ea.rly manhood onwards. Dudley North, of whom I
spoke in the chapter on Judges, was certainly a great
success ; so, in recent times, was Lord George Bentinck ;
so in one way or another, was the Duke of Wellington;
and other cases could easily be quoted of men beginning
their active parliamentary life in advanced manhood and
nevertheless achieving success ; but, as a rule, to which
there are very few exceptions, statesmen consist of men
who had obtained — it little matters how — the privilege of
entering Parliament in early life, and of being kept there.
Every Cabinet is necessarily selected from a limited field.
No doubt it always contains some few persons of very
high natural gifts, who would have found their way to the
front under any reasonably fair political rdgime, but it also
invariably contains others who would have fallen far
behind in the struggle for place and influence, if all
England had been admitted on equal terms to the
struggle.

Two selections of men occurred to me as being, on the
whole, well worthy of confidence. One, that of the
Premiers, begun, for convenience' sake, with the reign of
George III. ; their number is 25, and the proportion of
them who cannot claim to be much more than " emi-
nently " gifted, such as Addington, —

"Pitt is to Addington as London to Paddingtou,"—

is very small. The other selection is Lord Brougham's

h2

loo STATESMEN

" Statesmen of the Reign of George III." It consists of
no more than 53 men, selected as the foremost statesmen
in that long reign. Now of these, 11 are judges and, I
may add, 7 of those judges were described in the ap-
pendix to the last chapter, viz. Lords Camden, Eldon,
Erskine, Ellenborough, King, Mansfield, and Thurlow.
The remaining 4 are Chief Justices Burke and Gibbs,
Sir William Grant, and Lord Loughborough. Lord
Brougham's list also contains the name of Lord Nelson,
which will be more properly included among the
Commanders ; and that of Earl St. Vincent, which may
remain in this chapter, for he was a very able adminis-
trator in peace as well as a naval commander. In addition
to these, are the names of 9 Premiers, of whom one is
the Duke of Wellington, whom I count here, and again
among the Commanders, leaving a net balance, in the
selection made by Lord Brougham, of 31 new names to
discuss. The total of the two selections, omitting the
judges, is 57.

The average natural ability of these men may very
justly be stated as superior to class F. Canning, Fox,
the two Pitts, Romilly, Sir Robert Walpole (whom
Lord Brougham imports into his list), the Marquess
Wellesley, and the Duke of Wellington, probably exceed
G. It wiU be seen how extraordinary are the relationships
of these families. The kinship of the two Pitts, father
and son, is often spoken of as a rare, if not a sole, instance
of high genius being hereditary; but the remarkable
kinships of William Pitt were yet more widely diffused.
He was not only son of a premier, but nephew of
another, George Grenville, and cousin of a third. Lord
Grenville. Besides this, he had the Temple blood. His
pedigree, which is given in the appendix to this chapter,
does scant justice to his breed. The Fox pedigree is also
very remarkable in its connexion with the Lords Holland
and the Napier family. But one of the most conspicuous
is that of the Marquess Wellesley, a most illustrious
statesman, both in India and at home, and his younger
bi-other, the great Duke of Wellington. It is also curious,
from the fact of the Marquess possessing very remarkable

STATESMEN 101

gifts as a scholar and critic. They distinguished him in
early life and descended to his son, the late Principal of
New Inn Hall, at Oxford, but they were not shared by his
brother. Yet, although the great Duke had nothing of the
scholar or art-critic in him, he had qualities akin to both.
His writings are terse and nervous, and eminently effective.
His furniture, equipages, and the like were characterised
by unostentatious completeness and efficiency under a
pleasing form.

I do not intend to go seriatim through the many names
mentioned in my appendix. The reader must do that for
himself, and he will find it well worth his while to do
so ; but I shall content myself here with throwing results
into the same convenient statistical form that I have
already employed for the Judges, and arguing on the
same bases that the relationships of the Statesmen abun-
dantly prove the hereditary character of their genius.

In addition to the English statesmen of whom I have
been speaking, I thought it well to swell their scanty
numbers by adding a small supplementary list, taken from
various periods and other countries. I cannot precisely
say how large was the area of selection from which this
list was taken. I can only assure the reader that it contains
a considerable proportion of the names, that seemed to me
the most conspicuous among those that I found described
at length, in ordinary small biographical dictionaries.

TABLE I.

SUMMARY OF RELATIONSHIPS OF 35 ENGLISH STATESMEN,
GROUPED INTO 30 FAMILIES.

One relation (or tioo in the family).

Bolingbroke (Visct. St. John) g.
Disraeli ... F-

Francis, Sir P. F.

Grattau . . • g-

Horner . . B.

Perceval ... . . n.

Eomilly, Sir S S.

Scott (Lord Stowell) . . B.

Wilberforce S.

102 STATESMEN

Two or three relations (or three or fm,r irk flie family).

Bedford, Duke of, and gr. -gr. -grandson, Earl Eussell . GF. Gf. PP.

Bentinck (Duke of Portland) . . . . S. P.

Canning ... , . . . US. S.

Jenkinson (Earl of Liverpool) F. U. US.

Jervis (Earl St. Vincent) . . u. UP. UPS.

Lamb (Viscount Melbourne) . . . 2 B. 6. ^.

Petty (Marquess of Lansdowne) ffF. S.
Russell {see Bedford).

Stanley (Earl of Derby) . F. uS. S.

Stewart (Marquess of Londonderry) ... F. uS. B.

Four or more relations (or five or more in the family).

Dundas (Viscount Melville) . G. F. B. N. S. P.

2. Fox and Lord Holland . . . G. u. F. B. N. iVS. 2«S.

3. Grenville, Lord ; his father, George Gren-

ville ; also his cousin, William Pitt B. F. g. ttS. U.

Grey, Earl . . . . F. B. 2 S.

Holland, Lord (sea Fox).

Peel F. g. 2 B. 3 S.

2. Pitt, viz. Earl Chatham and bis son, "VVm.

Pitt (also, see Grenville) . F. N. u. uS. n.

Kobinson (Earl Ripon) G. F. gB. gF. S.

Sheridan . F. /. g. G. S. P. PS.

Temple (Viscount Palmerston) , B. GGB. GG. GGF.

Stuart (Marquess of Bute) . (?F. G. GU. GB. n. B. 2 R.

Walpole (Earl of Orford) . . . . G. B. 2S. iiG.

2. Wellesley, viz. the Marquess and his brother,

the Duke of Wellington . B. N. S. g(?F.

SUPPLEMENTARY LIST of 13 GREAT STATESMEN of VARIOUS
PERIODS AND COUNTRIES GROUPED into 9 FAMILIES.

2. Arteveldt, James, and son John . S.

Mirabeau . F.

More, Sir Thomas ... . . F.

2. De "Witt, John, and brother Cornelius . . B.
Adams , . S. P.

3. Cecil, Robt. ; father, Lord Burleigh ; and

cousin. Lord Bacon . F. mS.

Colbert . U. B. 2 S.. 2 N.

Guise, Duo de . B. 2 S. P. PS.

Richelieu F. B. BP. BPS. nS.

STATESMEN

103

TABLE II.i

Degrees of Kinship.

A.

B.

C.

D.

Name of the clegi-ee.

Corresponding letters.

Father .
Brother
Son

Grandfather

Uncle .

Nephew

Grandson . ...

Great-gi'andfather . .
Great-uncle .
First cousin
Great-nephew . . .
Great-grandson . .

All more remote .

13 F.
1.0 B.
19 S.

6 G.
3U.
6N.
4 P.

1 GF.
1GB.

3 US.
NH.
OPS.

14

5g.
4u.
1 n.
Op.

IgP.
IgB.
.■iuS.
1 nS.

OpS.

...

lOF.
OB.

VH.

1 NS.
OPS.

O9F.
Oi7B.
.3 i(S.
OnS.
0])S.

13
15
19

11
7
7
4

3
2
8
2

14

33
39
49

28
18
18
10

■0
21
.5

37

100
1.50
lOO

200
400
400
200

400
800
800
800
400

83-0
26-0
49-0

140
4-5
4-6
6-0

2-0
0-8
2-6
0-0
0-0

First, have the ablest statesmen the largest number of
able relatives ? Table I. answers this in the affirmative.
There can be no doubt, that its third section contains more
illustrious names than the first ; and the more the reader
will take the pains of analysing and " weighing " the
relationships, the more, I am sure, will he find this truth
to become apparent. Again, the Statesmen, as a whole,
are far more eminently gifted than the Judges ; accordingly
it will be seen in Table II., by a comparison of its column
B with the corresponding column in p. 5-5, that their rela-
tions are more rich in ability.

To proceed to the next test ; we see, that the third
section is actually longer than either the first or the second,
showing that ability is not distributed at haphazard, but,
that it affects certain families.

Thirdly, the statesman's type of ability is largely trans-
mitted or inherited. It would be tedious to count the
instances in favour. Those to the contrary are Disraeli,
Sir P. Francis (who was hardly a statesman, but rather
a bitter controversialist), and Horner. In all the other

' For explanation refer to the similar table in p. 55.

104 STATESMEN

35 or 36 cases in my appendix, one or more statesmen
will be found among their eminent relations. In other
wordSj the combination of high intellectual gifts, tact in
dealing with men, power of expression in debate, and
ability to endure exceedingly hard work, is hereditary.

Table II. proves, just as distinctly as it did in the case
of the Judges, that the nearer kinsmen of the eminent
Statesmen are far more rich in ability than the more
remote. It will be seen, that the law of distribution, as
gathered from these instances, is very similar to what we
had previously found it to be. I shall not stop here to
compare that law, in respect to the Statesmen and the
Judges, for I propose to treat all the groups of eminent
men, who form the subjects of my several chapters, in a
precisely similar manner, and to collate the results, once
for all, at the end of the book.

STATESMEN 105

APPENDIX TO STATESMEN
STATESMEN OF THE REIGN OF GEORGE III.

AS SELECTED BY LOKD BEOUGHAM IN HIS WELL-KNOWN
WOKK BEAKINO THAT TITLE.

The list consists of the followiug 53 persons, of whom 33, whose names
are printed in italics, find a place m my dictionary of kinships. It often
happens in this list that the same person is noticed under his title, as
well as surname; as, " Dundas (Viscount Melville) ; " — "Melville, Lord
(Dundas)."

AUen. *Beclford, Uh Ditke. Bolinglyi-oke. Bushe, Ld. Ch. Just.
Camden, Earl [Pratt). *Canning. Carroll. Castlereagh, Lord
(Londonderry) ; see Stewart. *Chatham, Lord (Pitt). Cuiran. Dundas
( Visd. Melville). Eldon, Lord (Scott). Erskinc, Lord. Ellenborough,
Lord [Laio). Fox. Francis, Sir Philip. Gibbs, Ld. Ch. Just. Grant,
Sir Wm. Grattan. *Grenville, George. *GrenviUe, Lord. Holland,
Lord. Horner. Jefferson. *Jenkinson (Earl Liverpool). Jervis (Earl
St. Vincent). King, Lord. Law (Lord Ellenborough). Lawrence, Dr.
* Liverpool, Earl (Jenkinson). Loughborough, Lord (Wedderbum).
Londonderry, Lord (Castlereagh ; see Stewart). Mansfield, Lord
(Murray). Melville, Lord (Dundas). Murray (Lord Mansfield).
Melson, Lord. *Nor(h, Lord. *Perceval. *Pitt (Earl of Chatham).
*Pitt, William. Pratt (Earl Camden). Ricardo. Bomilly.' St. Vincent
Earl (Jervis). Scott (Lord Eldon). Scott (Lord Stowell). StowcU, Lord
(Scott). Stewart (Lord Castlereagh, Marquess of Londonderry). Thurlow,
Lord. Tierney. Tooke, Home. Walpolc. Wedderburn (Lord
Loughborough). TFellesley, Marquess. JVilberforce. Wilkes, John.
"Windham.

PREMIERS SINCE ACCESSION OF GEORGE III.

There have been 25 Premiers during this period, as shown in the following
list, of whom 17, whose names are printed in italics, find a place in my
dictionary of kinships.

Nine of these have already appeared under the title of ' ' Statesmen of
George IIL" They are distinguished by a t.

It occasionally happens that the same individual is noticed under his
.surname as well as his title ; as "Chatham, Earl (Pitt) ;" — "Pitt (Earl
Chatham)."

Aberdeen, Earl. Addington (Sidmouth). fJBedford, ith Duke. Bute,
Marquess. Canning. ^Chatham. Earl (Pitt). Derby, Earl. Disraeli.
Gladstone. Goderich. Grafton, Duke. Grenville, George. Grenvillc,
Lord. Grey, Earl. Lansdowne (Shelburne). ^Liverpool, Earl.
Melbourne, Visct. Newcastle, Duke. iNorth, Lord. Palmerston
Ijord. Peel, Sir Robert. fPerceval. Pitt (Earl Chatham). fPitt,
William. Rockingham, Marquess. Uussell, Earl. SJielburne, Earl
(Lansdowne). Sidmouth, Lord (Addington). Wellington.

* Premier. t Included also in Brougham's list of Statesmen of Geo. III.

106 STATESMEN

Bedford, John, 4th Duke.

GP. "William, Lord Russell; patriot; executed 1683.

Gf. Lady Rachel W. Russell, her husband's secretary.
" Letters."

PP. 1st Earl Russell : Reform leader as Lord John Russell,
and three times Premier.
Bentinck, William H. Cavendish ; 3d Duke of Portland ;
Premier, 1783-4 and 1807-10.

S. Lord Wm. Henry Bentinck ; Governor-General of India,
who abolished Suttee, and established the liberty of
the Indian press.

P. Lord George Bentinck, M.P. ; became an eminent finan-
cier and a leading statesman in middle age, after a life
previously devoted to racing interests.
Bolingbroke, Henry ; created Viscount St. John ; the cele-
brated Secretary of State to Queen Anne. (His name
is appended to Brougham's list of Statesmen of Geo.

g. Sir Oliver St. John, Ch. Just. C. P. under the Protectorate
(and who himself was cousin to another judge, S.
Brown (see), under Charles II.).
Bute, Earl. ,S'ee Stuart.

Camden, Earl ; Lord Chancellor. »See under Judges.
P. and S.
Canning, George; created Lord Canning; Premier, 1827.
Not precocious as a child, but remarkable as a school-
boy. ("Microcosm," set. 15, and "Anti-Jacobin.')
Scholar, orator, and most able statesman. The Canning
family had sensitive and irritable temperaments.
A man of considerable literary acquirements.
Had great beau.ty and accomplishments. She took to
the stage after her husband's death without much
success ; they had both been separated from the rest
of the Canning family.
US. Stratford Canning ; created Lord Stratford de Redcliffe ;

ambassador at the Porte ; the " great Elchi."
[US.] George Canning, F.R.S., F.S.A., created Lord Garvagh.
S. Charles ; created Earl Canning ; was Governor-General
of India during the continuance and suppression of the
Indian Mutiny.
Castlereagh. See Stewart.

Disraeli, Rt. Hon. Benjamin; Premier, 1868. Precocious ;
began life in aix attorney's office ; became, when quite

Rl

STATESMEN 107

young, a novel-writer of repute, and, after one noted
failure, an eminent parliamentary debater and orator.
F. Isaac Disraeli ; author of " Curiosities of Literature."
Dund^as, Henry; created Viscount Melville; friend and
coadjutor of Wm. Pitt, and a leading member of his
administration in various capacities.

F. Robert Dundas, of Arniston ; Lord President of the

Court of Session in Scotland.

Gr. Robert Dundas ; Lord Arniston, eminent lawyer ; Judge
of Court of Session.

[GrF.] Sir James Dundas, M.P. for Edinburgh, Senator of
the College of Justice.

B. (A half-brother.) Robert Dundas ; Lord President of
the Court of Session, as his father had been before
him.

N. (A half-nephew.) Robert Dnndas (son of above) ; Lord
Chief Baron to the Court of Exchequer in Scotland.

S. Robert ; 2d Viscount ; Lord Privy Seal in Scotland.

P. Richard Saunders Dundas ; twice Secretary to the Ad-
miralty ; succeeded Sir C. Napier in chief command of
the Baltic fleet in the Russian War, 1855, and captvired
Sweaborg. (Mem. He was no relation to Sir James
W. D. Dundas, who was in chief command of the
Black Sea fleet during the same war.)
Eldon, Eaxl of ; Lord Chancellor. See in Judges, mider

Scott.
Ellenborough, Lord ; Chief Justice King's Bench. See in

Judges.
Erskine, Lord ; Lord Chancellor. See in Judges.
Fox, Rt. Hon. Charles James ; statesman and orator ; the
great rival of Pitt. At Eton he was left much to
himself, and was studious, but at the same time a
dissipated dandy, He was there considered of extra-
ordinary promise, ^t. 25, he had become a man of
mark in the House of Commons, and also a prodigious
gambler.

G. Sir Stephen Fox ; statesman ; Paymaster of the Forces.

Chelsea Hospital is mainly due to him; he projected it,

and contributed £1.3,000 towards it.
u. Charles ; 3d Duke of Richmond ; principal Secretary of

State in 1766.
F. Henry ; created Lord Holland ; Secretary at "War.
B. Stephen ; 2d Lord Holland ; statesman and social leader.

108 STATESMEN"

Fox, Rt. Hon. Charles James, continued —

N. Henry K, 3d Lord Holland; P.R.S., F.S.A., Recorder
of Nottingham. {See Lord Brougham's panegyric of
these men in his " Statesmen of George III.")
His aunt, Lady Sarah, sister of the Duke of Richmond,
married Colonel Napier, and was mother of the famous
Napier family. Colonel Napier was himself cast in the
true heroic mould. He had uncommon powers, mental
and bodily ; he had also scientific tastes. He was
Superintendent of Woolwich Laboratory, and Comp-
troller of Army Accounts.

mS. General Sir Charles James Napier, G.C.B. ; Commander-
in-Chief in India ; Conqueror of Scinde.

?iS. General Sir "William Napier ; historian of the Peninsular
War.

[3 mS.] There were three other Napiers, brothers, who were
considered remarkable men, namely. General Sir George,
Governor of the Cape ; Richard, Q. C ; and Henry,
Captain, and author of " History of Florence."

iVS. H. Bunbury, senior classic of his year (1833) at Cam-
bridge.
Francis, Sir Philip ; reputed author of " Jvmius ; " violent
antagonist of Hastings in India.

r. Rev. Philip ; poet and dramatic writer ; translator of
" Horace " and other classics. Had a school where
Gibbon was a pupil. He was also a political contro-
versialist.
Goderich, Viscount. See Robinson.
Grattan, Henry ; orator and statesman.

[GB.] Sir Richard Grattan, Lord Mayor of DubUn.

g. Thomas Marley, Chief Justice of Ireland.

[F.l James Grattan, Recorder of, and M P. for, Dublin.

[S.J Right Honourable James Grattan.
Grenville, George, Premier, 1763.

The very remarkable relationships of the Grenville family,
and the results of the mixture of the Temple race with
that of the 1st Earl of Chatham on the one hand, and
of the Wyndham on the other, is best understood by
the annexed table.

g. Sir Richard Temple; a leading member of the House of
Commons.

Ti. General Sir Richard Temple ; created "Viscount Cobham,
served under Marlborough.

STATESMEN

109

■<

B
3

ffl

pS

P4

T-t

O^

q

S

-s

,d

fl

^

■^

^

a:>

!>=

+j

is

c3

o

pj

C5

o

^

fl

.1-1

o

rJ

-rt

o.

C5

<■!

r-!

1=!

n1

CJ

Cl,

S

S

a

O

a

■M-2

a

-S B

H

a

03 O

H

o

O

KO

Qj

-4-=

H

(4-1

m

„ o

i-H

[E<

r^ <D

O

Pig

V?

S o

B

O

^

-^ 03

T' ^

ti

g^_

5 ^

-^

^ ?

H
H

1— 1

f3 's

CO g

a

.«

'3 a

g

.!h o —

<s

sneral.Sir K
reated Vise

H

CD g.

03 CD

o

O

ffi

rt <li C3 t/3

a 3 ^

.a pi >
« 3

^ r^ 'rt

-o^-fe — »

M

^..3 1

2 ^-a

-^ «rg a — =

SB

L 7-K t^ pi t^^-^'^ r-

^ ^ c5 o -*^ -l^
3 SS

OJ rrj ^ P-

C5<mS aj

"35 i

rPH g

-5 ^

g CO

^w

0.3

^ cS
,—1 03

•t;"5 t;
ce o g

^;3

o

O rH 03

tH 1h nd

tiD : 03
P3 R ^ -

-S.I

W-^

110 STATESMEN

Grenville, George, continued —
B. Richard, succeeded his mother the Countess, as 1st Earl

Temple ; statesman ; Lord Privy Seal.
S. William Wyndham Grenville ; created Lord Grenville ;

Premier, 1806.
S. George, 2d Earl Temple ; created Marquis Buckingham ;

twice Viceroy of Ireland.
S. Thomas, who bequeathed his library to the British Museum.
Grenville, William Wyndham; created Lord Grenville;

Premier, 1806 ; Chancellor of Oxford University.
B. Marquess Buckingham, twice Viceroy of Ireland.

E. George Grenville, Premier, 1763.

g. Sir William Wyndham, Bart., Secretary at War and

Chancellor of the Exchequer.
ttS. William Pitt, Premier.

U. Richard Grenville, created Earl Temple ; statesman.
Grey, Charles, 2d Earl; Premier, 1830-1834.

F. General in America, and early part of French War ;

created Earl Grey for his services.
B. Edward, Bishop of Hertford.

S. Henry G., 3d Earl; statesman; writer on Colonial govern-
ment, and on Reform.
S. Sir Charles Grey, Private Secretary to the Queen.
Holland, Lord. /See Fox,

Horner, Francis ; statesman, financier. One of the founders
of the Edinburgh lievieiv ; afterwards he rapidly rose to
great note in Parliament. His career was ended by
early death, a^t. 39.
B. Leonard Horner, geologist, for very many years a vene-
rated member of the scientific world.
Jenkinson, Robert Banks ; 2d Earl of Liverpool ; Premier,
1812-27.
F. Right Hon. Charles Jenkinson, created Earl Liverpool ;
See. of State ; a confidential friend and adviser of
Geo. III.
U.l John Jenkinson, colonel ; Joint Secretary for Ireland.
US.] John Banks Jenkinson, D.D., Bishop of St. David's.
Jervis, John, admiral ; created Earl St. Vincent; 1st Lord of
the Admiralty.
u. Right Hon. Sir Thomas Parker ; Ch. B.B.

UP. Thomas Jervis, M.P., Ch. Justice of Chester.
UPS. Sir John Jervis, M.P., Attorney-General; Ch. C. P.
(Vict.)

STATESMEN 111

King, Lord. See Judges.

Lamb, William, 2d Visct. Melbourne; Premier, 1834 and
1835-41.
B. Frederick, diplomatist, ambassador to Vienna; created

Lord Beauvale.
B. George, M.P., Under-Sec. of State for Home Department.
6. Lady Palmerston,

p. Et. Hon. Wm. F. Cowper, President of the Board of
Works, &c.
Larisdowne, Marquis. See Petty.
Liverpool, Lord. See Jbnkinson.
Londonderry. See Stewaet.

Nelson, Admiral ; created Earl Nelson. See Commanders.
North, Lord; created Earl Guilford; Premier, 1770-82.
[G.F.] Francis, 1st Baron Guilford. Lord Keeper. (James
II.) Whose three brothers and other eminent relations
are described in Judges. {See also Genealogical Table.)
Palmerston. See Temple.

Peel, Sir Robert; Premier, 1834-5, 1841-5, 1845-6.
F. Sir Robert Peel, M.P. ; created a Bart. A very wealthy
cotton manufacturer and of great mercantile ability, who
founded the fortunes of the family. He was Vice-Pre-
sident of the Literary Society.
g. Sir John Floyd, General, created a Bart, for services in

India.
B. Eight Hon. General Peel, Secretary of State for War.
B. Right Hon. Lawrence Peel, Chief Justice of Supreme
Court of Calcutta.

There were also other brothers of more than average
ability.
S. Rt. Hon. Sir Robert, 2d Bart. ; Chief Secretary for

Ireland.
S. Eight Hon. Frederick, Under Secretary of State for War.
S. Captain Sir William Peel, E.N., distinguished at Sebas-
topol and in India.
Perceval, Spencer; Premier, 1810-12.
n. 2d Lord Eedesdale, Chairman of Committees of House of
Lords. (He was son of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.)
n. Right Hon. Spencer Walpole, Secretary of State for Home
Department.
Petty, William Petty ; 2d Earl Shelburne ; created Marquis
Lansdowne ; Premier, 1782-3. An ardent supporter
of the Earl of Chatham ; in early life he distinguished
himself in the army, at Minden.

112 STATESME^r

Petty, William Petty, continued —

CF. Sir William Petty, pliysician, politician, and author ;
Surveyor-General of Ireland ; a man of singular ver-
satility, and successful in everything, including money-
making.

S. 3d Marquis Lansdowne, statesman and man of letters.
In youth, as Lord Henry Petty, he was one of the set
who founded the Edinhurgh Review. He then became
prominent as a Whig, in Parliament, and was Secretary
of State more than once. Was Chancellor of the
Exchequer, set. 26.
Pitt, William; created Earl of Chatham; Premier, 176fi.
Originally in the army, which he left set. 28 ; then the
vigorous opponent of Walpole in Parliament, "the
terrible cornet of Dragoons;" afterwards, set. 49, he
became one cf the ablest of statesmen, most brilliant
of orators, and the prime mover of the policy of England.
Married a Grenville. {See GeenvillE for genealogical
tree.)

[G.] Thomas Pitt, Governor of Eort George, who somehow or
other amassed a large fortune in India.

S. William Pitt, Premier.

p. Lady Hester Stanhope.

Pitt, William; 2d son of the 1st Earl of Chatham. Illustrious
statesman; Premier, 1783-1801 ; and 1804-6. Preco-
cious and of eminent talent ; frequent ill-health in
boyhood ; ast. 14 an excellent scholar. Never boyish
in his ways ; became a healthy youth set. 18. He was
Chancellor of the Exchequer set. 24, and Prime Minister
set. 25 : which latter office he held for seventeen years
consecutively. His constitution was early broken by
gout ; died set. 47.

F. Earl of Chatham, Premier.

N. Lady Hester Stanhope.

u. George Grenville, Premier.

uS. Lord Grenville, Premier.

n. Lady Hester Stanhope, who did the honours of his house,
and occasionally acted as his secretai'y ; she was highly
accomplished, tut most eccentric and more than half
mad. After Pitt's death, she lived in Syria, dressed as
a male native, and professed supernatural powers.
Portland, Duke of. See Bentinck.
Ripon, Earl of. See Robinson.

STATESMEN us

Robinson, Frederick John; 1st Viscount Godericli and Earl
of Ripon; Premier, 1827-8.

G. Thomas Eobinson, created Baron Grantham, diplomatist ;
afterwards Secretary of State.

F. Thomas Robinson, 2d Baron, also diplomatist, and after-
wards Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

gB. Charles Yorke, Lord Chancellor. See Judges.

gF. Philip Yorke, 1st Lord Hardwicke, Ld. Chan. See
Judges.

S. George F. (inherited) Earl de Grey and Ripon, Secretary
of State for War.
Romilly, Sir Samuel ; eminent lawyer and statesman. His
parents were French refugees. He was of a serious dis-
position in youth, and almost educated and supported
himself. Entered the bar, and attracted notice by a
pamphlet. He rose rapidly in his profession, and became
Solicitor-General and M.P. Eminent reformer of
criminal laws ; committed suicide set. 61.

S. Right Hon. Sir John Romilly, created Lord Romilly ;
Attorney-General and Master of the Rolls. See
Judges.
Russell, 1st Earl ; Premier. See Bedford.
Scott, "William ; cr. Lord Stowell, Judge of the Admiralty
Court.

B. Lord Eldon, Lord Chancellor. See Judges.

Lord Stowell and Eldon were each of them twins, each
having been born with a sister.
Shelburne, Earl of. jSfee Petty.

Sheridan, Richard Brinsley ; orator, extraordinary wit, and
dramatist. Was stupid as a boy of 7. When set. 1 1
was idle and careless, but engaging, and showed gleams
of superior intellect, as testified by Dr. Parr. On
leaving school he wrote what he afterwards developed
into the "Critic." Wrote the "Rivals" set. 24.
Died worn out in body and spirits set. 65.
He eloped in youth with Miss Linley, a popular singer of
great personal charms and exquisite musical talents.
Tom Sheridan was the son of that marriage. Miss
Linley's father was a musical composer and manager of
Drury Lane Theatre. The Linley family was " a nest
of nightingales : " all had genius, beauty, and voice.
Mrs. Tickel was one of them. The name of Sheridan
is peculiarly associated with a clearly marked order of

I

114 STATESMEN

brilliant and engaging but " ne'er-do-weel " qualities.
Richard Brinsley's genius worked in flashes, and left
results that were disproportionate to its remarkable
power. His oratorical power and winning address
made him a brilliant speaker and a star in society ;
but he was neither a sterling statesman nor a true
friend. He was an excellent boon companion, but
unhappy in his domestic relations. Reckless prodi-
gality, gambling, and wild living, brought on debts and
duns and a premature break of his constitution. These
qualities are found in a greater or less degree among
numerous members of the Sheridan family, as well as
in those whose biographies have been published. It is
exceedingly instructive to observe how strongly here-
ditary they have proved to be.

F. Thomas Sheridan, author of the Dictionary. Taught

oratory, connected himself with theatres, became, set. 25,
manager of Drury Lane. He was a whimsical but not
an opinionated man.

y. Frances Chamberlain, most accomplished and amiable.
Her father would not allow her to learn writing ; her
brothers taught her secretly : set. 15, her talent for
literary composition showed itself. She wrote some
comedies, one of which was as highly eulogized by
Garrick, as her novel " Sydney Biddulph " was pane-
gyrized by Fox and Lord North.

g. Rev. Dr. Philip Chamberlain, an admired preacher, but
a humorist and full of crotchets. (I know nothing of
the character of his wife. Miss Lydia Whyte.)

G. Rev. Dr. Thomas Sheridan, friend and correspondent of

Dean Swift. A social, punning, fiddling man, careless

and indolent ; high animal spirits. " His pen and his

fiddle-stick were in continual motion."
S. Tom Sheridan ; a thorough scapegrace, and a Sheridan all

over. (He had the Linley blood in him — see above) ;

married and died young, leaving a large family, of whom

one is —
F. Caroline, Mrs. Norton ; poetess and novelist.
PS. Lord Dufferin, late Secretary for Ireland, is the son of

another daughter.
Stanley, Edward Geoffrey; 14th Earl of Derby; Premier,

1852, 1858-9, 1866-8 ; scholar ; translator of " Homer "

into English verse, as well as orator and statesman.

STATESMEN 115

Stanley, Edward Geoffrey, continued —

F. Naturalist ; President of Linnrean and Zoological Socie-
ties ; known by his endeavours to acclimatize animals.

uS. Rev. J. J. Hornby, Head Master of Eton ; scholar and
athlete.

S. Edward, Lord Stanley, Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs.
Stewart, Robert; the famous Yiscount Castlereagh, and
2d Marquess Londonderrj'. Great hopes were enter-
tained of him when he entered Parliament, barely of
age, but he disappointed them at first, for lie was
a very unequal speaker. However, he became leader
of the House of Commons set. 29. Committed suicide.

F. Was M.P. for county Down, and raised through success-

ive peerages to the Marquisate.
uS. Sir George Hamilton Seymour, G.C.B. ; diplomatist,

especially in Russia and Austria,
B. (Half brother, grandson of Lord Chancellor Camden.)

Charles William ; created Earl Vane ; Adjutant-General

under Wellington in Spain set. 30.
[p.] (And P. to Duke of Grafton, Premier 1767.) Admiral

Fitzroy ; eminent navigator ("Voyage of the Beagle ").

Superintendent of the Meteorological Department of

the Board of Trade.
Stuart, John ; 3d Earl of Bute ; Premier, 1762-3.
u. 2d Duke of Argyll ; created Duke of Greenwich ; states-
man and general. In command at Sheriffmuir : —

"Argyll, tho State's whole thunder horn to wield,
And shake alike the senate and the field." — Pope.

G^F. Sir George Mackenzie, Lord Advocate ; eminent lawyer.

G. Sir James Stuart, 1st Earl of Bute ; Privy Councillor to

Queen Anne.
GU. Robert Stuart, 1st Baronet ; a Lord of Session, as Lord

Tillicoultry.
GB. Dugald Stuart, also a Lord of Session.
B. Right Hon. James Stuart, who assumed the additional

name of Mackenzie ; Keeper of Privy Seal of Scotland.
S. General Sir Charles Stuart ; reduced Minorca.
S. William, D.D. ; Archbishop of Armagh.
P. Charles ; ambassador to France ; created Baron Stuart

do Rothesay. His great-grandmother {Gf .) was Lady

Mary Wortley Montagu ; charming letter- writer ;

introducer of inoculation from the East.

116 STATESMEN

Temple, Henry J. ; Lord Palmerston ; octogenarian Premier,
1855-8, 1859-65. Was singularly slow in showing his
great powers, though he was always considered an able
man, and was generally successful in his undertakings.
He had an excellent constitution, • and high animal
spirits, but was not ambitious in the ordinary sense of
the word, and did not care to go out of his way to do
work. He was fully 45 years old before his states-
manlike powers were clearly displayed.
His father is described as a model of conjugal affection ;
he wrote a most pathetic and natural epitaph on his
wife. He was fond of literature and of pictures.
B. Sir William Temple; Minister Plenipotentiary to the
Court of Naples ; founder of the " Temple Collection "
of Italian antiquities, and works of art in the British
Museum.
GGrB. Sir William Temple, Swift's patron.
GGr. Sir John Temple, Attorney-General, and Speaker of the

House of Commons in Ireland.
GGF. Sir John Temple, Master of the Rolls in Ireland ; even
he was not the first of this family that showed ability.
Thurlow, Lord ; Lord Chancellor. See under Judges.
St. Vincent, Earl. See Jeevis.

Walpole, Sir Eoberi ; created Earl of Orford ; Premier
1721-42 (under Geo. I. and II., but included in
Brougham's volumes of the Statesmen of Geo. III.).
In private life hearty, good-natured, and social. Had a
happy art of making friends. Great powers of per-
suasion. For business of all kinds he had an extra-
ordinary capacity, and did his work with the greatest
ease and tranquillity
G. Sir Edward Walpole, M.P. ; distinguished member of the

Parliament that restored Charles II.
B. Horatio ; diplomatist of a high order ; created Baron

Walpole.
S. Sir Edward ; Chief Secretary for Ireland.
S. Horace ; famous in literature and art. Strawberry Hill.
Excellent letter-writer : Byron speaks of his letters as
incomparable. Gouty. Died set. 80.
wp. Admiral Lord Nelson.

A grandson [G.] of Horatio was minister at Munich, and
another was minister in Portugal. One of (he sons of the
former is Et. Hon. Spencer Walpole, Secretary of State.

STATESMEN 117

Walpole, Sir Robert, continued —
iV. Mrs. Darner, sculptor, daughter of Field-Marshal Conway,

cousin to Horace "Walpole.
Wellesley, Richard; created Marquess of Wellesley ;

Governor-General of India; most eminent statesman

and scholar.
B. Arthur ; the great Duke of Wellington.
■^B.] 1st Baron Cowley, diplomatist.
F.] 1st Earl of Mornington ; eminent musical tastes. He

inherited the estates and the name, but not the blood,

of the Wesleys, whose descendants were the famous

Dissenters, his father, Richard Colley, having obtained

them from his aunt's husband, who was a Wesley.
g(?F. The infamous judge. Sir John Trevor, M.R., the cousin

and the rival of the abler, but hardly more infamous.

Judge JefBreys.
IST. Henry Wellesley ; created Earl Cowley ; diplomatist ;

ambassador to France.
S. (Illegitimate.) Rev. Henry Wellesley, D.D. ; Principal

of New Inn Hall, Oxford ; a scholar and man of

extensive literary acquirements and remarkable taste

in art.
Wellesley, Arthur; created Duke of Wellington; Premier

See COMMANDEES.

B. Marquess Wellesley \

F. Earl Mornington ( ,

N. Earl Cowley V as above.

]Sr. Rev. Henry Wellesley )
Wilberforce, William; philanthropist and statesman; of
very weak constitution in infancy. Even set. 7 showed
a remarkable talent for elocution ; had a singularly
melodious voice, which has proved hereditary ; sang
well ; was very quick ; desultory at college. Entered
Parliament set. 21, and before set. 25 had gained high
reputation.

S. Samuel, Bishop of Oxford ; prelate, orator, and adminis-
trator.

[S.] Robert, Archdeacon ; Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford ;
subsequently became Roman Catholic.

[S.] Henry William ; scholar, Oxford, 1830. Subsequently
became Roman Catholic.

118 STATESMEN

SUPPLEMENTARY LIST OF GREAT STATESMEN
OF VARIOUS PERIODS AND COUNTRIES.

Adams, John (1735-1826), the second President of the United
States. Educated for the law, where he soon gained
great reputation and practice ; was an active politician
set. 30 ; took a prominent part in effecting the inde-
pendence of his country.
S. John Quincey Adams, sixth President of the United States ;

previously minister in Berlin, Russia, and Vienna.
P. Charles Francis Adams, the recent and well-known
American minister in London ; author of " Life of John
Adams."

Arteveldt, James Van (1345?); brewer of Ghent; popular
leader in the revolt of Flanders ; exercised sovereign
power for nine years.
S. Philip Van Arteveldt. See below.

Arteveldt, Philip Van (1382 1) ; leader of the popular party,
long subsequently to his father's death. He wa^ well
educated and wealthy, and had kept aloof from politics
till ast. 42, when he was dragged into them by the
popular party, and hailed their captain by acclamation.
He led the Flemish bravely against the French, but
was finally defeated and slain.
F. James Van Arteveldt. See above.

Burleigh, Earl. See Cecil.

Cecil, William; created Lord Burleigh; statesman (Eliza-
beth) ; Lord Treasurer. " The ablest minister of an
able reign." "Was Secretary, or chief Minister, during
almost the whole of Queen Elizabeth's long reign of
forty-five years. He was distinguished at Cambridge
for his power of work and for his very regular habits.
Married for his second wife the daughter of Sir Anthony
Cooke, director of the studies of Edward VI., and sister
of Lady Bacon, the mother of the great Lord Bacon,
and had by her — •
S. Robert Cecil, who was created Earl of Salisbury the
same day that his elder brother was created Earl of
Exeter. He was of weakly constitution and de-
formed. Succeeded his father as Prime Minister
under Elizabeth, and afterwards under James I. ;
was unquestionably the ablest minister of his time,
but cold-hearted and selfish. Lord Bacon was mS. to him.

STATESMEN 119

Cecil, William, continued —
B.l 1st Earl of Exeter.
F.J Master of the Eobes to Henry VIII.
Colbert, Jean Baptiste; French statesman and financier
(Louis XIV.); eminent for the encouragement he
gave to public works and institutions, to commerce
and manufactures. He was fully appreciated in his
early life by Mazarin, who recommended him as his
successor. He became minister set. 49, and used to
work for sixteen hours a day. His family gave
many distinguished servants to France.

U. Odart ; a merchant who became a considerable financier.

B. Charles ; statesman and diplomatist.

S. Jean Baptiste ; statesman ; intelligent and firm of
purpose ; commanded, when still a mere youth, the
expedition against Genoa in 1684.

S. Jacques Nicholas, archbishop; member of the Academy

N. Jean Baptiste (son of Charles) ; diplomatist.

N. Charles Joachim ; prelate.

The family continued to show ability in the succeeding
generation.
Crom\A;'ell, Oliver ; Lord Protector of the Commonwealth.

Z7S. Hampden the patriot, whom Lord Clarendon speaks of
as having " a head to contrive, a tongue to persuade,
and a heart to execute any mischief ; " — this word " mis-
chief " meaning, of course, antagonism to the King.

Cp. Edmund Waller, the poet, a man of very considerable
abilities both in parliamentary eloquence and in poetry,
but he was not over-stedfast in principle. He was n.
to Hampden.

S. Henry ; behaved with gallantry in the army, and acted
with much distinction in Ireland as Lord Deputy.
He had one other son and four daughters, who married

able men, but their descendants were not remarkable.
The Cromwell breed has been of much less importance
than might have been expected from his own genius
and that of his collaterals, Hampden and Waller.
Besides his son Henry, there is no important name
in the numerous descendants of Oliver Cromwell.
Henry's sons were insignificant people, so were those
of Richard, and so also were those of Cromwell's
daughters, notwithstanding their marriage with such
eminent men as Ireton and Fleetwood. One of

120 STATESMEN

Oliver's sisters married Archbishop Tillotson, and
had issue by him, but they proved nobodies.
Guise, Francis Balafre, Duke of. The most illustrious
among the generals and great political leaders of this
powerful French family. He had high military talent.
He greatly distinguished himself as a general set. 34,
and was then elevated to the dignity of Lieutenant-
General of the kingdom.

B. Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine.

S. Henry (Duke of Guise, also called Balafre). He was
less magnanimous and more factious than his father ;
was the adviser of the massacre of St. Bartholomew ;
and he caused Coligny to be murdered; was himself
murdered by order of Henri III., set. 38.

S. Cardinal, arrested and murdered in prison, on the same
day as his brother.

[S.] Due de Mayenne.

P. Charles, who, together with his uncle, the Duo de
Mayenne, was leader of the league against Henri IV.

PS. Henry, conspired against Cardinal Eichelieu.

Thus there were four generations of notable men in the
Guise family.
Mirabeau, H. G. Riquetti, Comte de; French statesman,
" The Alcibiades of the French Revolution." A man
of violent passions, ardent imagination, and great
abilities. He had prodigious mental activity, and
hungered for every kind of knowledge.

F. Marquis de Mirabeau; author of " L'Ami des Hommes,"
a leader of the school of the Economists ; a philanthro-
pist by profession, and a harsh despot in his own family.

[B and 6.] There were remarkable characters among the
brothers and sisters of Mirabeau, but I am unable
to state facts by which their merits may be distinctly
appraised.
It is said that among many generations of the Mirabeaus
— or more properly speaking, of the Riquettis, for
Mirabeau was an assumed name — were to be found
men of great mental vigour and character. Thus St.
Beuve says — and I give the extract in full and without
apology on account of the interest ever attacliing itself
to Mirabeau's characteristics —
"Les Correspondances du pere et de I'oncle du grand
tribun, la Notice sur son grand-pere, et en general

STATESMEN 121

toutes les pieces qui font le tissu de ces tuit volumes,
ont revele une race a part des caracteres d'une origi-
nalite grandiose et haute, d'ou notre Mirabeau n'a eu.
qu'a descendre pour se repandre ensuite, pour se pre-
cipiter comme il Fa fait et se distribuer a tous, telle-
ment qu'on peut dire qu'il n'a et6 que 1' enfant perdu,
I'enfant prodigue et sublime de sa race."

He combined his paternal qualities with those of his
mother : —

" Ce n'etait suivant la definition de son pere qu'un male
monstreux au physique et au moral.

'' II tenait de sa mere la largeur du visage, les instincts,
les appetits prodigues et sensuels, mais probablement
aussi ce certain fond gaillard et gaulois, cette f aculte de se
familiariser et de s'humaniser que les Riquetti n'avaient
pas, et qui deviendra un des moyens de sa puissance.

" Une nature riche, ample, copieuse, genereuse, sou vent
grossiere et vicee, souvent fine aussi, noble, meme ele-
gante, et, en somme, pas du tout monstreuse, mais des
plus humaines."
More, Sir Thomas ; Lord Chancellor (Henry VIII.) ; eminent
statesman and writer ; singularly amiable, unaffectedly
pious, and resolute to death. When set. 13, the Dean
of St. Paul's used to say of him, "There was but one
wit in England, and that was young More."
P. Sir John More, Just. K. B.

[S. and 3 s.] Besides his three accomplished daughters,
Margaret Eoper, Elizabeth Dauncy, and Cecilia
Heron, Sir Thomas More had one son called John.
Too much has been said of the want of capacity of
this son. His father commended the purity of his
Latin more than that of his daughters, and Grynseus
{see under Divines) dedicated to him an edition of
Plato, while Erasmus inscribed to him the works of
Aristotle. He had enough strength of character to
deny the king's supremacy, and on that accovmt he
lay for some time in the Tower under sentence of
death. (''Life of More," by Eev. Joseph Hunter,
1828, Preface, p. xxxvi.)
Richelieu, Armand J. du Plessis, Cardinal Due de^ Ihe
great minister of France under Louis XIV. He was
educated for arms, but devoted himself to study, and
entered the Church at a very early age— earlier than
was legal— and became Doctor, ^t. 39 he was chief

122 STATESMEN

minister, and thenceforward he absolutely reigned for
eighteen years. He was not a lovable man. He
pursued but one end — the establishment of a strong
despotism. Died set. 57.

F. rran9ois du Plessis, seigneur de Richelieu ; signalized
himself as a soldier and a diplomatist. Was promoted
to be " grand prev6t de France," and was highly
rewarded by Henri IV.

[B.] Henri ; became " marechal de camp," and was killed in
a duel just when he was about to be promoted to the
government of Angers.

B. Alphonse L. ; Cardinal of Lyons. Became a monk of
the Chartreuse, and practised great austerity. He
behaved nobly in Lyons at the time of the plague.

BP. (Grandson of Henri.) Louis F. Armand, Due de Eiche-
lieu. He was Marshal of France, and personified the
eighteenth century ; being frivolous, fond of intrigue,
immoral, without remorse, imperturbably good-
humoured, and courageous. He was a seven months'
child, and lived to set. 92. His children were —

BPS. The " trop celfebre " Due de Fronsac.

BP/S'. The witty and beautiful Countess of Egmont.

BPP. (Son of the Due de Fronsac.) Armand E., Due de
Richelieu; Prime Minister of France under Louis
XVIII. Died in 1822.

nS. Comte de Gramont, wit and courtier. See under
LiTEEAEY Men.
Witt, De, John. The younger brother of two of the ablest and
more honourable of Dutch statesmen. They were in-
separable in their careers, but difEerent in character ;
each, however, being among the finest specimens of his
peculiar type. John played the more prominent part,
on account of his genial, versatile, and aspiring
character. He rose through various offices, until, set. 27,
he became Grand Pensionary, virtually the chief magis-
trate, of Holland. He was savagely murdered, set. 47.

B. Cornelius De "Witt. See below.

[F.] A party leader of some importance.
Witt, De, Cornelius; had more solid, though less showy
parts, than his brother, but was in reality the more
efficient supporter of that power which his brother John
exercised. He, also, was savagely murdered, set. 49.

B. John De Witt. See above.

[F.] See above.

ENGLISH PEERAGES, THEIR INFLUENCE UPON RACE 123

ENGLISH PEERAGES,
THEIR INFLUENCE UPON RACE

It is frequently, and justly, remarked, that the families of
great men are apt to die out ; and it is argued from that
fact, that men of ability are unprolific. If this were the
case, every attempt to produce a highly-gifted race of men
would eventually be defeated. Gifted individuals might
be reared, but they would be unable to maintain their
breed. I propose in a future chapter, after I have dis-
cussed the several groups of eminent men, to examine the
degree in which transcendent genius may be correlated
with sterility, but it will be convenient that I should now
say something about the causes of failure of issue of
Judges and Statesmen, and come to some conclusion
whether or no a breed of men gifted with the average
ability of those eminent men, could or could not maintain
itself during an indefinite number of consecutive genera-
tions. I will even go a little further a-field, and treat
of the extinct peerages generally.

First, as to the Judges : there is a peculiarity in their
domestic relations that interferes with a large average of
legitimate families. Lord Campbell states in a foot-note
to his life of Lord Chancellor Thurlow, in his " Lives of
the Chancellors," that when he (Lord Campbell) was first
acquainted with the English Bar, one half of the judges
had married their mistresses. He says it was then the